I worked with an ex-Mormon guy for about a year or so who was an ex-CIA contractor. He said there are a lot Mormons in the CIA as well and they called it the "Mormon Mafia" (mostly in a joking manner).
So when he'd meet new people within the CIA who were Mormon they would sometimes ask him, "Mormon Mafia?", if they suspected he was Mormon.
This guy did his mission in Russia and speaks Russian... so there you go. He had some crazy stories about doing mission work in Russia. He was almost killed several times.
Note that “mission” in the parent comment likely refers the practice of certain Christian sects that send out evangelists to proselytize in another geographic area. It probably is not referring to CIA operations.
(Posting this because there is a dead peer comment that seems to have misunderstood).
The LDS church specifically has a practice where many young LDS members go on a "mission" for two years. In fact it is so common that almost every LDS member would understand the phrase "[a specific person]'s mission" to refer to that two year mission for proselytizing.
Thanks for the clarification. I'm not an American, so when I read that he was working for CIA and had been on missions in Russia (nearly got killed) without any context, and I assumed the worst.
This completely changes the meaning and makes more sense
As a member of the church that also served a mission in Russia, this all checks out. Putin's government and the Russian Orthodox church were incredibly brutal towards outside religions.
I would guess that they are 'brutal' (your word) towards evangelical religions, which does make sense if they want to protect their culture that is linked to the Russian Orthodox church. I don't imagine they are 'brutal' towards Buddhism, for example, which isn't evangelical (i.e. doesn't send out missionaries and only teaches its religion to those who express an interest by themselves).
Visiting some of the historical museums I found there was a, brief, time when the Mormons tried making their own script and empire. I believe it was called "Deseret". Later they tried to get it accepted as a state.
Interestingly, I've found a lot of parallels between early Islam and early Mormonism. Both of their leaders had similar tendencies and both were evicted from their original location where they claimed their new Zion. Though Mohammed was more successful in retaking Mecca whilst the Mormons were forced out of Missouri (1).
In no specific order:
- Prophet's with dubious histories prior to their revelation
- Both given new revelations from an angel
- Both claim a that the Christians or Jews had corrupted the original gospels
- Focus on political power early on
- Polygamy prominent among early leaders
- No alcohol
- Strong focus on certain forms of "purity"
On the empire topic, one might consider Utah. It was originally desired for the name to be Deseret and one of the two primary competing news organizations locally is called Deseret News[0]. In practice it's not really an empire (for all of the obvious reasons) but it's also kinda hard to ignore the influence that the church has on most of the population.
[0] https://www.deseret.com/ I didn't know this was the domain until now. There you go, I guess.
It was a phonetically correct alphabet for English.
In case you are unfamiliar, in many languages, the language is written exactly as it is spoken. For example, in Spanish and Italian, words are written exactly as they are pronounced. If you can read the word, you can pronounce it though you might not know the meaning.
Children in English-speaking places will usually have to study "spelling" where they learn how to correctly spell words.
Deseret alphabet was pronounced exactly as it was written which shows which spoken accents the speakers had.
Not really sure how Mohammed can be said to have a "dubious" history. If you don't want to believe the traditional accounts, that's fair, but late antiquity was not a golden age of objective recorded history lol, so there isn't much better info to go off otherwise. I would refer people to r/AcademicQuran on issues of early Islamic history.
I can't say whether Smith had a "dubious" history, but I'm not inclined to take this view because people think it's ok to bigoted and dismissive of the Church of LDS, and I think it's unfair.
Also polygamy was part of pre-Islamic Arabia, whereas it was contrary to custom and law in the context in which the LDS Church developed. Comparison on this point is superficial.
The Mormons own a pretty big chunk of Missouri where they believe Zion is. I think the idea is that when the End Times come, they'll be the ones doing the evicting.
tldr: 120 emigrants were traveling by wagon train towards California, passing through Utah. They set up camp south of Salt Lake in a meadow for the night and woke up to being surrounded by the Mormon militia, painted as Native Americans who then opened fire on them, killing 120 men, women, and children. Their goal was to frame Native Americans of the massacre.
Mormons did spare any child under the age of 8 because Mormon Doctrine states that children under 8 are innocent and they were taken and raised into Mormonism.
Lots of messy things at that time. For example, it was legal to kill a member of the church of Jesus Christ (i. e. Mormon ) in Missouri from 1838 to 1976. Doesn't make it right, but there were a lot of difficult relationships
To add, it wasn’t just opening fire and killing that many. They opened fire, lied siege, and prompted the settlers to surrender. Then executed everyone expect the few children younger than 8.
This did happen and it was egregious, but there is slightly more to the story (not that it makes it ok).
Years ago in Arizona I worked with a guy who was a descendant of John D. Lee who was the ringleader and later executed for his role in this attack. Lee's Ferry over the Colorado river is named for him also. So I looked into John D Lee a bit.
The people in the wagon train were believed to have been those who had burned the Mormons out in Missouri, and although it seems revenge is a more likely motive then fear, there may have been an element of both. At any rate it wasn't just bushwhacking random wagon trains as many passed through the territory at the time.
I found Lee's account an interesting read and his grandson (or great grandson) looked very much like him.
Sounds potentially problematic, having a lot of members of one group, any group, in your intelligence service? But then again, i can imagine the type of person who would be willing to apply to an intelligence service in the first place...
Most Mormons I’ve met are so wholesome and kind that I think they would legitimately choose to work in the FBI or IC to make the world a better place. If we’re gonna have one group overrepresented I can’t think of a better one, and I disagree with basically all of their beliefs.
For one the IC basically excludes edgier and free spirited types, or those with baggage, by design. It also excludes financially motivated people and academic types - in practice we’ve already ruled out most of the urban upper middle/upper classes and most poorer people. Among the remainder you have to pick those with college education that are willing to live in or around cities. And then among those, people willing to commit to a long career, believe in the cause, maintain discretion, unlikely to fall off the wagon… and without any kind of concerning overt bigotry. Besides people who enlisted directly out of high school I feel like Mormons are the only major group who would consistently fit the bill.
> Most Mormons I’ve met are so wholesome and kind that I think they would legitimately choose to work in the FBI or IC to make the world a better place.
Yes, they would, and very often they'd be so convinced of their righteousness that they’d use their power as government agents to run over anything that thet saw as standing in the way of their vision of a better place.
If you look at the history of abuses by the FBI, almost none of them were venal and corrupt, they mostly were just putting a vision of a path to a better world ahead of things like due process.
This is exactly the kind of thing motivating the saying “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. ”
Most humans I've met are wholesome, too. Of the Mormons I've known, several are utter scoundrels, quite a few were mean and petty, and many were dishonest when it suited them. Much like the rest of humanity, there are bad people who happen to be Mormon, and good people who happen to be Mormon. Several Mormons I knew developed a drinking habit on their mission, fell out for a while, and returned to the church.
Don't buy into the mythos. They're just people. The one trait that I did note as almost-uniform among the practicing Mormons that I've known is a distinct holier-than-thou attitude. In the good ones, that seemed to keep them honest. In the bad ones, it was their justification for misbehavior -- especially the petty meanness.
As a counterpoint, the two architects of the CIA torture program, one of the most evil of things that has ever come out of the CIA (which is a ridiculously high bar), were Mormons. High ranking Mormons in ecclesiastical positions, teaching love on Sunday, and torture on Monday through Saturday. And they probably legitimately thought they were making the world a better place...in a very compartmentalized and thoroughly corrupted way. Religion is a plague on this world...people can be just as easily corrupted by it as they can be elevated by it. I'd prefer to not have any group overrepresented at the CIA.
Most mormons I've met are actually pretty normal. If it didn't somehow slip they were LDS, you would never know, and that's in Salt Lake City where there are many.
I spoke with some LDS youngsters who came to my door some time back. They're friendly. I learned that they do not like being referred to as "Mormon" but instead prefer "LDS". For them, being called Mormon is derogatory.
I was raised Mormon. The whole time I grew up we were told by all the previous prophets to be proud to be called Mormon. It was a sense of pride.
But the new/current prophet hates it and said that God told him he doesn't like the name anymore and that being called Mormon is "a victory for Satin" (the devil).
God is a little inconsistent within Mormonism. First he wanted Polygamy and it was sooo important that he even sent an Angel with a flaming sword down to earth to get them to practice polygamy (even though the prophet was already practicing it in secret at the time). Then in 1904 when the Supreme Court forced the church to stop practicing polygamy or else they would take all assets away. Then magically within days, God told the prophet that its actually ok if they don't do polygamy anymore. Then he hated black people for a while and wouldn't let them into the temple or get the priesthood (which essentially kept them out of heaven according to Doctrine), then changed his mind in 1978 when public pressure was mounting. He didn't want children of Gay people to be baptized in his church for a few years, and then changed his mind after the PR got really bad. Mormon God is heavily influenced by American PR.
The next prophet will probably embrace the name "Mormon" again. So don't stress too much about it. Most active Mormons can't keep track of what doctrine currently is or isn't which is why so many times you get different answers from different mormons about policies and doctrine. Because it really depends which prophets you grew up under, because things change dramatically as they take the helms of power and claim to speak for God.
When I was growing up in the 90s, I had a few LDS friends. My school had a ton of LDS kids for some reason even though I didn't grow up in an area that's known for them. These kids always described themselves as "mormon". I never heard the term "Latter Day Saints" until much later.
Huh? The current prophet doesn't "hate" it, and never said that God told him He doesn't like it either. You're putting your own words into his mouth. Let's be more precise in representing others, even if we disagree with them.
Youngsters are probably not the best source for this info as they're too young to remember that 20 years ago "Mormon" was perfectly fine, and in fact a lot of Mormons called (and still call) themselves "Mormon." Some time back the leadership of the Church decided that Mormon was offensive for some reason and made it so.
But then "LDS" is now out of date as well! The leadership has decided that they don't want to be called "LDS" anymore. They even dumped the wonderfully succinct "lds.org" domain for "churchofjesuschrist.org."
Now they want you to use the full name of the Church (at least the first time referenced in the convo), which is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." So for example, if you want to refer to a person you would have previously called "Mormon" or "LDS," you should instead use "member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." There is a minor relief though. On subsequent references you can shorten it to "Church of Jesus Christ" or "the restored Church of Jesus Christ."[1]
Personally I like the (still silly long) acronym COJCOLDS. But realistically very few Mormons are going to offended if you call them "LDS."
It has been a cycle. For a period before Hinckley was president (1995-2008), the term Mormon was discouraged. Hinckley was more media savvy and embraced it. Going even further back, Mormon was acceptable. It all depends who is in charge at the time.
All members of the LDS are Mormons; but, not all Mormons are members of the LDS. In addition to the LDS, there is also the the Fundamentalist Church of (Jesus Christ of) Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ.
I think there are over 40 churches descended from the teachings of Joseph Smith now (someone knowledgeable once told me this, I don't have a source). Most of them are very small.
An initial split occurred before leaving Missouri with a large number of followers including Joseph Smith's mother and other family members (as I recall) choosing to follow James Strang to Beaver Island instead of Brigham Young to Utah.
That settlement was forcibly broken up, but it's an interesting story. You can google James Strang, (The King of Beaver Island) to read more on it. That church is still around as well and claim to be the true inheritors of the teachings of Smith.
This is a new phenomenon, too. It was only a few years ago that there was a church-wide semiannual congregation (known as General Conference) where the leadership announced that it was bad to be referred to as "Mormon".
The reasoning is: Mormon is a character in their scripture (The Book of Mormon), but he is not the main figurehead for the church, so referring to them as though he is, is a misrepresentation.
Mormon was an ancient prophet who compiled and abridged the record which he called the Book of Mormon. When the church started publishing the book, people started calling members of the church, 'Mormons'. It was largely used as a derogatory term by those who did not like the church, but members eventually embraced it.
Kind of like the term 'Yankee' was a derogatory term for Americans that the British came up with. Eventually, Americans embraced it and even named a baseball team after it.
The church and its members do not think the term is bad, but think it can distract those who think the church is not Christian so it is trying to de-emphasize it.
The reasoning is: Mormon is a character in their scripture (The Book of Mormon), but he is not the main figurehead for the church, so referring to them as though he is, is a misrepresentation.
That's the explanation I was given as well. Thanks for clarifying and thank you all for the explanations.
I've seen a lot of good things in this thread, but also a lot of innocent misconceptions.
I'm a practicing and believing member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. AMA, I guess, to see if I can clear up some misconceptions.
I do have some non-mainstream beliefs for a member of the Church, but I am quite orthopraxic as far as members go.
(TIL what orthopraxy means; thank you to the two commenters who defined it!)
Just so you know, my stance is that anyone can do what they wish so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, but don't force me to say that what you're doing is ideal.
Yes, I said "ideal," not "okay." That's where my beliefs are not quite mainstream.
"my stance is that anyone can do what they wish so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" sounds straightforward at first, but: how does one define "hurt"? Honest and curious question.
I would expect a lot of people to share that general stance, but differ widely on what it means to hurt or get hurt, and when to stay clear and when to intervene even if it's not you that gets hurt, or when some action merely has the potential to hurt.
I don't know how others define it, and I'm not sure I could pin down my own feelings about it.
Here's a starting point: don't push something on someone without helping them understand the consequences.
As an example, when I become a parent, I want my child to be baptized a member of the Church. But I sure will not allow that child to be baptized until he/she understands the covenants that come along with baptism, understands what must be done to keep the covenants, and wants to be baptized.
It would be a great hurt if I did not do otherwise. I feel like many parents who are members hurt their children by pushing them into baptism without properly teaching them why and letting the child make their own decision.
I grew up a practicing Catholic but have always been especially fascinated with other Christian denominations. Forgive my elementary question.
Wikipedia frames the Mormon belief with Joseph Smith as being seen at a similar level to Elijah or Moses. Prophetic, but still human and imperfect. Would you say that’s roughly accurate?
That's not just roughly accurate, that's exactly accurate.
I don't see Elijah or Moses as perfect either.
Jehovah chastised Moses at the burning bush for saying that he was not a good speaker and not having faith that the Lord could make him a great speaker.
He also corrects Elijah in 1 Kings 19 when Elijah says that only he is left. The Lord says that there are more. He also teaches Elijah about Himself, so obviously Elijah didn't know everything.
Also, Elijah was prone to outbursts, kind of like how Peter the Apostle was impulsive.
No, prophets are not perfect. But we listen to them anyway. Or should.
> Often, after a long career in the FBI, agents will join the Latter-day Saints’ Security Department
Why does a church have a security department, especially one that staffs so many people? The article states that most of them work desk jobs, which probably means they aren't running physical security at individual churches, so what kind of threats does the church overall face?
They have a large number of volunteers either proselytizing or serving in various countries. Security help ensure that the areas they serve in are reasonably safe. For example, moving out people in advance of the war in Ukraine [1]. These are similar to the teams or consultants that travel manage risks for large, global conglomerates.
In addition any high profile event or personality is a potential target and requires people who can help manage the risks.
They also lobby hard, and track their missionaries closely. I'll give them a pass on some of the missionaries work, they often go to places that can be dicey.
Unrelated, I once did a salesforce buildout for a well-known church. You would be surprised at the amount of fields on the “church member management” page. Large text fields for input on “what did this person say about the church that was negative?” Investigation and credibility tracking… I was shocked.
No it's not. The church owns a lot of property and has many high profile leaders. Church security does not do anything close to police work on/for parishioners.
As a former mormon with most of my family in intelligence or military, the Security Clearance reason may be valid but I call bullshit on the language skills reason. Most mormon missionaries will never learn enough of their respective mission languages to actually have normal conversations, as 99% of their conversations revolve around religion. And the FBI doesn’t really have an emphasis on language anyway, that is more of a CIA thing (which also recruits a lot of Mormons). It’s funny how all of the glowing traits that are claimed about Mormons that are cited as reasons to hire them always come from the perspective of other Mormons.
That being said, this is the first one that I’ve read that has slightly touched on one of the major reasons: Mormon nepotism. The Mormon Mafia talk in this article may sound like a joke, but it is very much a real phenomenon. If you hire a single Mormon, and that person achieves a position of influence in your company, you will wake up some day to the realization that there are now hundreds of Mormons...and they all had a say in hiring each other, and they all give glowing reviews about each other, and they all end up in the same organizations, and they all get promoted in lockstep with each other. The Mormon Mafia isn't an FBI thing, it is a real phenomenon that happens in a lot of different places. I got a great job out of college primarily out of Mormon nepotism. I got fired after leaving Mormonism for the same reason.
A good way to prevent this from happening is, not surprisingly, a general anti-nepotism practice: don’t allow people interview candidates from their alma mater. 99% of these asshole Mormons that try to create Mormon Mafias within companies went to BYU, and 99% of the people they want to hire at the exclusion of others also went to BYU. It works surprisingly well for non-Mormon nepotism as well...never underestimate an HBS grad's tendency to think other HBS grads are the bee's knees. Don’t let them have a say in their hiring.
> If you hire a single Mormon, and that person achieves a position of influence in your company, you will wake up some day to the realization that there are now hundreds of Mormons...and they all had a say in hiring each other, and they all give glowing reviews about each other, and they all end up in the same organizations, and they all get promoted in lockstep with each other.
Lots of cultures do this, different asian sub-ethnicities, Jewish people, immigrants. You know who don't seem to do it much in my experience (and should), African Americans. I am opposed to nepotism personally, but I see it happen so much that I think everyone should take a crack at it if they can.
It helps that the mormon faith is fairly harmless as far as religions go. Aside from maybe polygamy and abuse cases, there are few explicit conflicts of interests. The LDS church runs hedge funds and have a somewhat less extreme political orientation than e.g. southern baptists or Scientologists . Most Mormons actually practice the family values they preach, unlike say evangelicals.
I don't know about nepotism, but I have heard the security background were easier with mormons. If you list all mormons as references and the investigators go and ask other mormons about how good and trustworthy you are as a person, what would you expect them to say?
I would also wonder what the ratio of atheists in the organizations were compared to the general population.
> It’s funny how all of the glowing traits that are claimed about Mormons that are cited as reasons to hire them always come from the perspective of other Mormons.
I'm Jewish and have a pretty positive (in the standard ways) view of Mormons. Would have considered living in Utah if there were more of a modern orthodox Jewish community there. Can't imagine better neighbors.
The west is trying to get rid of meritocracy not realizing the only other options that have been successfully implemented by humans are nepotism and discrimination.
> The west is trying to get rid of meritocracy not realizing the only other options that have been successfully implemented by humans are nepotism and discrimination.
“Meritocracy” is just discrimination where the speaker agrees with the basis of discrimination, thus seeing it as “merit”. It isn’t an alternative to discrimination.
As a former Mormon myself, I think you're being ridiculous. And frankly, you sound pretty bitter and may not be the most neutral of judges.
Mormon nepotism isn't anything more than you see from other people around their things (church, schools, even sports teams). I lived and worked in Utah County of all places for years (where huge percentage of people are Mormon) and the majority try to be open minded, tolerant, and accepting. Now if you go around shitting on their most sacred beliefs or being an asshole, don't expect it not to affect their feelings toward you, just like it would any other human. I've also lived and worked in places where I was the only Mormon (or one of 2 or 3) in the whole group.
If your claim that being Mormon causes this nepotism (rather than say, just being human as I would claim), then it must be something about their faith that causes it. Where do you think that comes from? Can you point out a teaching or belief of theirs that would encourage this?
> They will always prefer hiring other Mormons, and they will use a bunch of bullshit reasons why they’re better than others as their cover.
You realize this is what all humans do right? We make decisions emotionally and then justify them rationally, even to ourselves. Frankly I find it disturbing that you advocate against actively discriminating against a group of people on that basis. You could easily s/Mormon/gay or anything else in there and it would be exactly as truthful/accurate.
Also, the "Mormon Mafia" is a joke, not an actual thing. For most it's a self-aware attempt at humor.
Just anecdotal but as someone in the Pacific Northwest with a large Mormon population I have seen this occur in government and doctors offices, slowly everyone replaced by Mormons. My current office the practitioner I work with is the only non-mormon left and he's not happy about it. Mormons look out for each other, which ends up in this situation. It's nothing more nefarious than that but still off putting to those outside the church as it very much seems like a 'Mormon Mafia'.
Side note, out of prison Mormons were the only religion that actively supported ex-cons and would set you up with a place to stay and a job if you didn't have one. I seriously thought about converting just for the stability (and still might). The Catholic church had monks come to prison but I couldn't even get a visit with a priest/monk at my previous church once outside to just talk about coming back to society, my fears, and re-adjustment. Or a single parishioner to talk with. But they did offer tele-counseling (if I had insurance).
While people do love to get involved in some delicious nepotism, some groups do it more.
I have worked in the same area and I have seen a team of 35 go from 1 or 2 Mormons to 30. Slowly, the less palatable personalities were let go and replaced by friendly Molly's. So it's not as ridiculous as you are proclaiming.
It's not some huge conspiracy, but it does happen. Mormons are definitely more likely to hire someone they know from their Church than most Social Groups who source candidates internally. It's not malicious...generally it's just a matter of kinship... "Oh, I heard Jeff's daughter needs a job! Bring her in for an interview!"
My dad also posts on online forums, claiming to also be a former Mormon while still having unrelentlessly positive things to say about Mormons. He's very much still a Mormon, much like I would expect you to be. Have some integrity. The vast majority of ex-Mormons are definitely bitter, and would love to destroy the church, and for a multitude of entirely valid reasons. The exmormon subreddit, which is the most popular and active of all of the ex-religion subreddits, can fill you in on exactly why exmormons are so bitter about their former religion if you're curious.
And you're right. All humans do this to some degree. Mormons, with their sanctimonious belief that they are the only ones that can receive revelation from god, seem to do it far more than other groups. Something about believing in the Power of Discernment...if the Bishop thinks this guy is a great guy, then he obviously is a great guy!
And you're also right that the Mormon Mafia is a joke, but it is only a joke within the Mormon Mafia. For everyone else, it is a career nightmare. If you, god forbid, go to a bar with a couple colleagues after work, you can expect to never be treated the same ever again. You'll be passed up for promotion, denied positions of responsibility and trust, and constantly have your work called into question. Because you're not trustworthy anymore...you're an alcoholic. Wouldn't it be nice if we had less alcoholics on our team? Gee, where can we find fewer alcoholics? I know...BYU!
EDIT: I should add, out of an abundance of caution due to the upset Mormons that I have just offended, that there are plenty of Mormons that are not like this. I'd probably say most mormons are not like this. One of the managers I work with most is a mormon, and he knows that I'm exmormon, and we get along fine. He also has hired 14 non-mormon people, including two muslims, a lesbian, and his top performer is an ex-heroin addict, so I'm pretty damn sure he's open minded about other people and isn't just looking to pack his org with like-minded people. I would never propose a measure to discriminate against mormons, but I absolutely would try to mitigate their tendency towards nepotism. There are enough mormon nepotists out there that it has become a problem, and I'm just calling that out.
Did I miss the percent of Mormons in the FBI mentioned? I see the 2% of US population identified, but nowhere how many are in the FBI. According the Pew Research Center[0] 1.6% of the US population is Mormon in 2014. The FBI employs approximately 35,000 people [1].
Looking at differently [2] - take the population of the US; subtract all who are not citizens, under-age, over-age, non-computer users, have no bachelors; subtract all who cannot secure a clearance, subtract all who lack the specific skills required for the role, subtract all who are not willing to take a mediocre salary, and, and, and... What do you have left?
There might be a correlation (we do not know, as we do not have a percent of Mormons in the FBI), but the factors identified are also readily present in several other groups.
I could have written an article that the US DoD hires disproportionately color-blind people. We should investigate! (I can back this up with real numbers too ;))
> Mormon people often have strong foreign language skills, from missions overseas
I remember reading that the Mormon language school that prepares people for their overseas mission trips has a lot of Special Forces personnel from the military attending as well.
The reason: the number of languages taught at the Mormon school exceeds those taught at the military language schools. This includes dialects spoken by a tiny proportion of the global population but that population is strategically useful to some agenda of US foreign policy.
Not exactly correct. The Mission Training Center has only missionaries of the church attend for language training. But, Special Forces and many other agencies have studied and patterned their own language training off of the MTC model.
random anecdote, but the first company i worked at, most of the team/org was mormon. and to make things even weirder, the boss was also the local "bishop" so he was everybody's boss in both the secular and spiritual worlds. not sure how common this sort of thing is, but i definitely felt at a disadvantage compared to the mormon people on the team.
I'm a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
It's pretty common, but if you felt at a disadvantage compared to the members, that bishop/boss was not doing his job properly. We're not supposed to favor members, even if only slightly.
Unfortunately, it's natural to do so because there is an implicit assumption that there are shared values.
Isn't there some memo from Scientology saying that they had goals to get members into such bureaucratic positions and recruit members in those positions?
I can get why the FBI may be drawn to Mormons, but I also wouldn't be surprised is the Mormons actively encouraged their members to get jobs with the FBI.
Operation Snow White, run by Scientology, was one of the largest government infiltrations in US History. I don’t see any evidence that the same thing is happening with the Mormon church though.
Nah. Zero messaging internally encouraging government work.
I'd say the high level of education, pro-work, pro-patriotism, high morality emphasis on top of the extra level of foreign language competency makes it a natural fit.
I was surprised to find out recently my Dad had applied to the CIA back in the 60s- but on reflection not too surprised. The more the 60s and 70s went counter-culture, the more that the Utah/AZ/Idaho axis of Mormons went from their traditional pro-Democratic post FDR base to a pro-government pro-Republican, anti-Communist direction.
He ended up going into business instead, but if his background check hadn't gone on so long, he'd likely would have taken a .gov offer if it'd come before his corporate offer.
Having grown up Mormon, I'd add a 4th that wasn't mentioned in the article: deference to authority. The Mormon church is a very hierarchal organization. Orders go from the top down. People lower on the ladder should not ever contradict their leaders. When a Mormon leader asks you to do something, you expected to comply. I imagine that this mindset would make you fit in well in the FBI, at least in the lower and middle layers of the organization.
3. Mormons are overwhelmingly white and come from a cultural background of conservative patriarchal Christian whiteness which comports with the historical and present culture of the FBI.
I would add that their culture is a good match. They are Lawful Good through and through. Historically their church youth programs were tightly integrated with the Boy Scouts (until a recent split as BSA became more inclusive), and are raised to have a strong sense of duty to their church, country and community.
> Historically their church youth programs were tightly integrated with the Boy Scouts
In western states, yes. In the east it ran from supportive to apathetic to passive-aggressively hostile. In some councils, the split wasn't all bad for the BSA.
Coffee and black/green tea are typically considered to be prohibited (I know active members who drink green tea and still participate fully), but caffeine in general isn't banned. One of the apostles even acknowledged drinking a whole lot of diet coke to help while learning to use a computer[0]:
> It took a great deal of time, repetition, patience; no small amount of hope and faith; lots of reassurance from my wife; and many liters of a diet soda that shall remain nameless.
The caffeine thing is a long-standing internal debate that arises from:
1. Unclear doctrinal specifics
2. An orthopraxic rather than an orthodoxic culture
The first item is that the only doctrine possibly relating to caffeine is a single verse in modern scripture that says "hot drinks are not for the body or belly". Long-standing teaching by leadership has merely narrowed down "hot drinks" to mean tea and coffee.
The second item is by far more important in the debate: Mormons are _highly_ orthopraxic, meaning that you're usually free to hold heterodox doctrinal beliefs as long as your public life and behavior reflects the common orthopraxy. Or, to put it simply, the public appearance of righteousness is culturally far more important than internal doctrinal beliefs (this is, ironically enough, not technically doctrinal). The same chapter that defines "hot drinks" (coffee/tea) as not good for the belly defines beer ("barley... for mild drinks") as entirely appropriate, but since the orthopraxic behavior is to be seen as avoiding coffee, tea, hard liquor (which is specifically called out in the same scripture) then avoiding anything above and beyond those is often seen as an increased sign of righteousness.
So you'll often have arguments between Mormons who follow the letter of the law and others who follow what they define as the spirit of the law. And since coffee and tea both contain caffeine then many Mormons will avoid caffeine as well.
You'll find this same argument about following just the doctrine defined in the open canon versus following behavioral practices above and beyond it in other aspects of Mormon life, such as: not calling members of the church or the church "Mormon," payment of 10% of monthly income (though the scriptures call for 10% of an annual "increase"), women only wearing at most one set of earrings, no dating for youth below the age of 16, men applying to serve missions the instant their 18th birthday arrives (though the window for honorable service is many years wide), no clapping in meetings, no drums or brass in meetings, and so on for many other cultural practices.
This is, as you can probably recognize from some of the items in that list, in no way a phenomenon isolated to the LDS religion, but it does inform the inevitable debate you'll hear if you ever bring up caffeine in a group of Mormons.
Opinions differ. Best as I can tell, like all other dogmas, their rules are some blend of urban legends, game of telephone, and calvinball.
eg The nephew of the owner, prepping for his missionary work, gravely explained to me that he has to be careful not to immerse himself in open waters (or maybe it was just moving water) past the belt line. Something about being vulnerable to witches or demonic possession or whatever. And it was totally true because his cousin's best friend knew a guy who swam while on mission and then died.
It depends on the family. My girlfriend wasn't allowed to drink any caffeine when she was a kid. Caffeine was normal in my family though. Coffee is pretty universally frowned upon (I don't get it either). Apparently Mtn Dew > Coffee as it pertains to health. They base their dietary standard on the "Word of Wisdom".
Source: grew up Mormon, and still have a close relationship with my Mormon family.
Descendants of survivors of the trek to Utah carry their genes. If there is someone to be scared of it is survivors, for you know not what they did to survive.
> "Mormon people often have strong foreign language skills, from missions overseas"
> "a relatively easy time getting security clearances, given their abstention from drugs and alcohol"
> "and a willingness to serve"
It's quite a strange religion, not to be offensive. I always get approached by them at the mall when i'm in the US...I always think to myself the kind of person is drawn to this belief around the character of Joseph Smith.
Mormonism is more strange than most. The leader who started it was literally a traveling treasure digger in 1820's New York. He conned people out of money by going to houses and telling them that they had treasure on their property and if they paid him, he would dig it up. He was never successful, but moved from town to town doing so. He often claimed that this treasure was left by Native Americans and ancient inhabitants. The law eventually caught up to him and he was even tried in court for these accusations and admitted to the con. Just a few years later, low and behold he found ancient scriptures made of gold buried in his backyard. These were written in an unknown language ("reformed egyption", I language that scientists now say never existed), that only he could read. He translated the book which eventually became the "Book of Mormon" today, which is the baseline for most of Mormonism.
He then gained a following by claiming to speak directly to God and writing these discourses in a book called "The Book of Commandments", which the modern church has now edited down to what they still use, known as "The Doctrine and Covenants", which they believe are direct words from God. This is where strange rules like not drinking coffee, tea, and alcohol come from, which modern Mormons follow today. Funny enough, the founder didn't prescribe to any of these rules himself, in fact he was drinking heavily on the night of his death.
The leader, Joseph Smith took his followers from state to state as the nation expanded, building a larger and larger following. He was kicked out of each state due to unruly practices in that they were starting to preform, like an attempted assassination on the Missouri Governor (he was shot 4 times in the upper chest and head and managed to survive), starting an illegal bank and printing his own currency, practicing polygamy (he was married to at least 38 women that we have record of, but probably many more), and much more.
The prophet, Joseph Smith died after a newspaper ran a story that unveiled his polygamy to the world. He got his militia together and burned the printing press down. This lead to his warrant and eventual arrest. While in jail he had arranged for his militia to break him out of prison. So when they heard a mob approaching the jail where he was kept, he actually told the jail guards that his militia was coming and they didn't want to die for this. So the guards stepped aside and let the mob approach the prison, only to find that the mob was filled with angry people from town that had read about this story or who were upset with the many other things Joseph Smith had done. They approached in protest. Joseph Smith had smuggled a gun into the prison in a trenchcoat, she he started firing at them through a door, and a firefight broke out as a result, leaving Joseph Smith dead.
After Joseph Smith, comes Brigham Young who took all the Mormons to modern-day Utah to start a fresh life. From there, a whole other fascinating story begins. Including things like "Blood Atonement" (killing people to absolve them of their sins), more polygamy, The Utah War (armed Mormons fought off several bands of US Military), the Mountain Meadows Massacre (120 immigrants were killed in cold blood that were passing through Utah heading to California), and so many more that I can't get into here.
It is quite a fascinating history if you are curious. This isn't even getting into Doctrine. Much of which is a spiritual spin off Stone Masons rituals, the basis that Jesus visited the modern-day-USA after he died on the Cross in Jerusalem, a whole group of ancient Americans who traveled over from Jerusalem in 600BC, and so much more.
Its definitely different than your standard religion.
Christianity has lot of weird stuff. When you really start to think it over from roots and consider certain aspects. But members are just told to follow and ignore those aspects. Not to mention the stuff that is simply ignored if you would slightly expand it.
I worked with an ex-Mormon guy for about a year or so who was an ex-CIA contractor. He said there are a lot Mormons in the CIA as well and they called it the "Mormon Mafia" (mostly in a joking manner). So when he'd meet new people within the CIA who were Mormon they would sometimes ask him, "Mormon Mafia?", if they suspected he was Mormon.
This guy did his mission in Russia and speaks Russian... so there you go. He had some crazy stories about doing mission work in Russia. He was almost killed several times.
Note that “mission” in the parent comment likely refers the practice of certain Christian sects that send out evangelists to proselytize in another geographic area. It probably is not referring to CIA operations.
(Posting this because there is a dead peer comment that seems to have misunderstood).
The LDS church specifically has a practice where many young LDS members go on a "mission" for two years. In fact it is so common that almost every LDS member would understand the phrase "[a specific person]'s mission" to refer to that two year mission for proselytizing.
1 reply →
Thanks for the clarification. I'm not an American, so when I read that he was working for CIA and had been on missions in Russia (nearly got killed) without any context, and I assumed the worst.
This completely changes the meaning and makes more sense
This is how I interpreted the OP as well. Just replying to supply the word "missionary" in case it helps anyone make the connection.
As a member of the church that also served a mission in Russia, this all checks out. Putin's government and the Russian Orthodox church were incredibly brutal towards outside religions.
I would guess that they are 'brutal' (your word) towards evangelical religions, which does make sense if they want to protect their culture that is linked to the Russian Orthodox church. I don't imagine they are 'brutal' towards Buddhism, for example, which isn't evangelical (i.e. doesn't send out missionaries and only teaches its religion to those who express an interest by themselves).
2 replies →
In what way? I regularly get to enjoy pipe organ at a local Catholic Christian church.
I've only heard about controversies regarding Jehovah's Witnesses, but that's the problem nonspecific to Russia.
They are brutal towards proselytizing ones, certainly.
[dead]
Even 150 years ago, Mormons had quite the reputation for both fighting for ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Battalion ) and fighting against ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_War ) the U.S. Army.
Visiting some of the historical museums I found there was a, brief, time when the Mormons tried making their own script and empire. I believe it was called "Deseret". Later they tried to get it accepted as a state.
Interestingly, I've found a lot of parallels between early Islam and early Mormonism. Both of their leaders had similar tendencies and both were evicted from their original location where they claimed their new Zion. Though Mohammed was more successful in retaking Mecca whilst the Mormons were forced out of Missouri (1).
In no specific order:
- Prophet's with dubious histories prior to their revelation - Both given new revelations from an angel - Both claim a that the Christians or Jews had corrupted the original gospels - Focus on political power early on - Polygamy prominent among early leaders - No alcohol - Strong focus on certain forms of "purity"
1: https://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/mormon.asp
> their own script and empire ... Deseret
On the empire topic, one might consider Utah. It was originally desired for the name to be Deseret and one of the two primary competing news organizations locally is called Deseret News[0]. In practice it's not really an empire (for all of the obvious reasons) but it's also kinda hard to ignore the influence that the church has on most of the population.
[0] https://www.deseret.com/ I didn't know this was the domain until now. There you go, I guess.
>> tried making their own script and empire. I believe it was called "Deseret":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deseret_alphabet
It was a phonetically correct alphabet for English.
In case you are unfamiliar, in many languages, the language is written exactly as it is spoken. For example, in Spanish and Italian, words are written exactly as they are pronounced. If you can read the word, you can pronounce it though you might not know the meaning.
Children in English-speaking places will usually have to study "spelling" where they learn how to correctly spell words.
Deseret alphabet was pronounced exactly as it was written which shows which spoken accents the speakers had.
2 replies →
Not really sure how Mohammed can be said to have a "dubious" history. If you don't want to believe the traditional accounts, that's fair, but late antiquity was not a golden age of objective recorded history lol, so there isn't much better info to go off otherwise. I would refer people to r/AcademicQuran on issues of early Islamic history.
I can't say whether Smith had a "dubious" history, but I'm not inclined to take this view because people think it's ok to bigoted and dismissive of the Church of LDS, and I think it's unfair.
Also polygamy was part of pre-Islamic Arabia, whereas it was contrary to custom and law in the context in which the LDS Church developed. Comparison on this point is superficial.
4 replies →
Many early apostles including Brigham Young, and even Joseph Smith, drank alcohol.
The Mormons own a pretty big chunk of Missouri where they believe Zion is. I think the idea is that when the End Times come, they'll be the ones doing the evicting.
Since we are adding acts of Mormon rebellion and killing. It is worth also adding Mountain Meadows Massacre to the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Meadows_Massacre
tldr: 120 emigrants were traveling by wagon train towards California, passing through Utah. They set up camp south of Salt Lake in a meadow for the night and woke up to being surrounded by the Mormon militia, painted as Native Americans who then opened fire on them, killing 120 men, women, and children. Their goal was to frame Native Americans of the massacre.
Mormons did spare any child under the age of 8 because Mormon Doctrine states that children under 8 are innocent and they were taken and raised into Mormonism.
Lots of messy things at that time. For example, it was legal to kill a member of the church of Jesus Christ (i. e. Mormon ) in Missouri from 1838 to 1976. Doesn't make it right, but there were a lot of difficult relationships
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Extermination_Order
To add, it wasn’t just opening fire and killing that many. They opened fire, lied siege, and prompted the settlers to surrender. Then executed everyone expect the few children younger than 8.
This did happen and it was egregious, but there is slightly more to the story (not that it makes it ok).
Years ago in Arizona I worked with a guy who was a descendant of John D. Lee who was the ringleader and later executed for his role in this attack. Lee's Ferry over the Colorado river is named for him also. So I looked into John D Lee a bit.
Here is his account:
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mountainmeadow...
The people in the wagon train were believed to have been those who had burned the Mormons out in Missouri, and although it seems revenge is a more likely motive then fear, there may have been an element of both. At any rate it wasn't just bushwhacking random wagon trains as many passed through the territory at the time.
I found Lee's account an interesting read and his grandson (or great grandson) looked very much like him.
False Flag operation and war crimes all before breakfast.
1 reply →
Sounds potentially problematic, having a lot of members of one group, any group, in your intelligence service? But then again, i can imagine the type of person who would be willing to apply to an intelligence service in the first place...
Most Mormons I’ve met are so wholesome and kind that I think they would legitimately choose to work in the FBI or IC to make the world a better place. If we’re gonna have one group overrepresented I can’t think of a better one, and I disagree with basically all of their beliefs.
For one the IC basically excludes edgier and free spirited types, or those with baggage, by design. It also excludes financially motivated people and academic types - in practice we’ve already ruled out most of the urban upper middle/upper classes and most poorer people. Among the remainder you have to pick those with college education that are willing to live in or around cities. And then among those, people willing to commit to a long career, believe in the cause, maintain discretion, unlikely to fall off the wagon… and without any kind of concerning overt bigotry. Besides people who enlisted directly out of high school I feel like Mormons are the only major group who would consistently fit the bill.
> Most Mormons I’ve met are so wholesome and kind that I think they would legitimately choose to work in the FBI or IC to make the world a better place.
Yes, they would, and very often they'd be so convinced of their righteousness that they’d use their power as government agents to run over anything that thet saw as standing in the way of their vision of a better place.
If you look at the history of abuses by the FBI, almost none of them were venal and corrupt, they mostly were just putting a vision of a path to a better world ahead of things like due process.
This is exactly the kind of thing motivating the saying “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. ”
2 replies →
> Most Mormons I’ve met are so wholesome
Most humans I've met are wholesome, too. Of the Mormons I've known, several are utter scoundrels, quite a few were mean and petty, and many were dishonest when it suited them. Much like the rest of humanity, there are bad people who happen to be Mormon, and good people who happen to be Mormon. Several Mormons I knew developed a drinking habit on their mission, fell out for a while, and returned to the church.
Don't buy into the mythos. They're just people. The one trait that I did note as almost-uniform among the practicing Mormons that I've known is a distinct holier-than-thou attitude. In the good ones, that seemed to keep them honest. In the bad ones, it was their justification for misbehavior -- especially the petty meanness.
As a counterpoint, the two architects of the CIA torture program, one of the most evil of things that has ever come out of the CIA (which is a ridiculously high bar), were Mormons. High ranking Mormons in ecclesiastical positions, teaching love on Sunday, and torture on Monday through Saturday. And they probably legitimately thought they were making the world a better place...in a very compartmentalized and thoroughly corrupted way. Religion is a plague on this world...people can be just as easily corrupted by it as they can be elevated by it. I'd prefer to not have any group overrepresented at the CIA.
5 replies →
Most mormons I've met are actually pretty normal. If it didn't somehow slip they were LDS, you would never know, and that's in Salt Lake City where there are many.
> i can imagine the type of person who would be willing to apply to an intelligence service in the first place...
What?
I spoke with some LDS youngsters who came to my door some time back. They're friendly. I learned that they do not like being referred to as "Mormon" but instead prefer "LDS". For them, being called Mormon is derogatory.
I was raised Mormon. The whole time I grew up we were told by all the previous prophets to be proud to be called Mormon. It was a sense of pride.
But the new/current prophet hates it and said that God told him he doesn't like the name anymore and that being called Mormon is "a victory for Satin" (the devil).
God is a little inconsistent within Mormonism. First he wanted Polygamy and it was sooo important that he even sent an Angel with a flaming sword down to earth to get them to practice polygamy (even though the prophet was already practicing it in secret at the time). Then in 1904 when the Supreme Court forced the church to stop practicing polygamy or else they would take all assets away. Then magically within days, God told the prophet that its actually ok if they don't do polygamy anymore. Then he hated black people for a while and wouldn't let them into the temple or get the priesthood (which essentially kept them out of heaven according to Doctrine), then changed his mind in 1978 when public pressure was mounting. He didn't want children of Gay people to be baptized in his church for a few years, and then changed his mind after the PR got really bad. Mormon God is heavily influenced by American PR.
The next prophet will probably embrace the name "Mormon" again. So don't stress too much about it. Most active Mormons can't keep track of what doctrine currently is or isn't which is why so many times you get different answers from different mormons about policies and doctrine. Because it really depends which prophets you grew up under, because things change dramatically as they take the helms of power and claim to speak for God.
When I was growing up in the 90s, I had a few LDS friends. My school had a ton of LDS kids for some reason even though I didn't grow up in an area that's known for them. These kids always described themselves as "mormon". I never heard the term "Latter Day Saints" until much later.
Huh? The current prophet doesn't "hate" it, and never said that God told him He doesn't like it either. You're putting your own words into his mouth. Let's be more precise in representing others, even if we disagree with them.
4 replies →
Youngsters are probably not the best source for this info as they're too young to remember that 20 years ago "Mormon" was perfectly fine, and in fact a lot of Mormons called (and still call) themselves "Mormon." Some time back the leadership of the Church decided that Mormon was offensive for some reason and made it so.
But then "LDS" is now out of date as well! The leadership has decided that they don't want to be called "LDS" anymore. They even dumped the wonderfully succinct "lds.org" domain for "churchofjesuschrist.org."
Now they want you to use the full name of the Church (at least the first time referenced in the convo), which is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." So for example, if you want to refer to a person you would have previously called "Mormon" or "LDS," you should instead use "member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." There is a minor relief though. On subsequent references you can shorten it to "Church of Jesus Christ" or "the restored Church of Jesus Christ."[1]
Personally I like the (still silly long) acronym COJCOLDS. But realistically very few Mormons are going to offended if you call them "LDS."
[1]: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/style-guide
It has been a cycle. For a period before Hinckley was president (1995-2008), the term Mormon was discouraged. Hinckley was more media savvy and embraced it. Going even further back, Mormon was acceptable. It all depends who is in charge at the time.
1 reply →
Is that an effort to blend in more with evangelicals?
21 replies →
All members of the LDS are Mormons; but, not all Mormons are members of the LDS. In addition to the LDS, there is also the the Fundamentalist Church of (Jesus Christ of) Latter-day Saints and the Community of Christ.
CNN's web site had a piece on this yesterday: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/29/us/mormon-beliefs-explained-c...
I think there are over 40 churches descended from the teachings of Joseph Smith now (someone knowledgeable once told me this, I don't have a source). Most of them are very small.
An initial split occurred before leaving Missouri with a large number of followers including Joseph Smith's mother and other family members (as I recall) choosing to follow James Strang to Beaver Island instead of Brigham Young to Utah.
That settlement was forcibly broken up, but it's an interesting story. You can google James Strang, (The King of Beaver Island) to read more on it. That church is still around as well and claim to be the true inheritors of the teachings of Smith.
https://www.ldsstrangite.com/
> Fundamentalist Church of (Jesus Christ of) Latter-day Saints
The correct abbreviation is FLDS I think.
This is a new phenomenon, too. It was only a few years ago that there was a church-wide semiannual congregation (known as General Conference) where the leadership announced that it was bad to be referred to as "Mormon".
The reasoning is: Mormon is a character in their scripture (The Book of Mormon), but he is not the main figurehead for the church, so referring to them as though he is, is a misrepresentation.
Mormon was an ancient prophet who compiled and abridged the record which he called the Book of Mormon. When the church started publishing the book, people started calling members of the church, 'Mormons'. It was largely used as a derogatory term by those who did not like the church, but members eventually embraced it.
Kind of like the term 'Yankee' was a derogatory term for Americans that the British came up with. Eventually, Americans embraced it and even named a baseball team after it.
The church and its members do not think the term is bad, but think it can distract those who think the church is not Christian so it is trying to de-emphasize it.
That's the explanation I was given as well. Thanks for clarifying and thank you all for the explanations.
Reminds me of this Reddit AMA+Answer from an ex-CIA officer.
https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/a8c03j/i_am_andrew_bu...
Don't know how it went over in the Mormon community, but us Ags loved it.
What is an Ag?
Presumably a graduate from Texas A&M (the other organization identified).
4 replies →
Agnostics?
I've seen a lot of good things in this thread, but also a lot of innocent misconceptions.
I'm a practicing and believing member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. AMA, I guess, to see if I can clear up some misconceptions.
I do have some non-mainstream beliefs for a member of the Church, but I am quite orthopraxic as far as members go.
(TIL what orthopraxy means; thank you to the two commenters who defined it!)
Just so you know, my stance is that anyone can do what they wish so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, but don't force me to say that what you're doing is ideal.
Yes, I said "ideal," not "okay." That's where my beliefs are not quite mainstream.
"my stance is that anyone can do what they wish so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" sounds straightforward at first, but: how does one define "hurt"? Honest and curious question.
I would expect a lot of people to share that general stance, but differ widely on what it means to hurt or get hurt, and when to stay clear and when to intervene even if it's not you that gets hurt, or when some action merely has the potential to hurt.
That's a good point.
I don't know how others define it, and I'm not sure I could pin down my own feelings about it.
Here's a starting point: don't push something on someone without helping them understand the consequences.
As an example, when I become a parent, I want my child to be baptized a member of the Church. But I sure will not allow that child to be baptized until he/she understands the covenants that come along with baptism, understands what must be done to keep the covenants, and wants to be baptized.
It would be a great hurt if I did not do otherwise. I feel like many parents who are members hurt their children by pushing them into baptism without properly teaching them why and letting the child make their own decision.
I grew up a practicing Catholic but have always been especially fascinated with other Christian denominations. Forgive my elementary question.
Wikipedia frames the Mormon belief with Joseph Smith as being seen at a similar level to Elijah or Moses. Prophetic, but still human and imperfect. Would you say that’s roughly accurate?
That's a great question.
That's not just roughly accurate, that's exactly accurate.
I don't see Elijah or Moses as perfect either.
Jehovah chastised Moses at the burning bush for saying that he was not a good speaker and not having faith that the Lord could make him a great speaker.
He also corrects Elijah in 1 Kings 19 when Elijah says that only he is left. The Lord says that there are more. He also teaches Elijah about Himself, so obviously Elijah didn't know everything.
Also, Elijah was prone to outbursts, kind of like how Peter the Apostle was impulsive.
No, prophets are not perfect. But we listen to them anyway. Or should.
> Often, after a long career in the FBI, agents will join the Latter-day Saints’ Security Department
Why does a church have a security department, especially one that staffs so many people? The article states that most of them work desk jobs, which probably means they aren't running physical security at individual churches, so what kind of threats does the church overall face?
They have a large number of volunteers either proselytizing or serving in various countries. Security help ensure that the areas they serve in are reasonably safe. For example, moving out people in advance of the war in Ukraine [1]. These are similar to the teams or consultants that travel manage risks for large, global conglomerates.
In addition any high profile event or personality is a potential target and requires people who can help manage the risks.
1 -https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/missionarie...
Great way to hide money -- be a church.
They also lobby hard, and track their missionaries closely. I'll give them a pass on some of the missionaries work, they often go to places that can be dicey.
I would imagine it’s less to police or protect the church locations and more to “police” the actions of their parishioners.
Unrelated, I once did a salesforce buildout for a well-known church. You would be surprised at the amount of fields on the “church member management” page. Large text fields for input on “what did this person say about the church that was negative?” Investigation and credibility tracking… I was shocked.
1 reply →
No it's not. The church owns a lot of property and has many high profile leaders. Church security does not do anything close to police work on/for parishioners.
As a former mormon with most of my family in intelligence or military, the Security Clearance reason may be valid but I call bullshit on the language skills reason. Most mormon missionaries will never learn enough of their respective mission languages to actually have normal conversations, as 99% of their conversations revolve around religion. And the FBI doesn’t really have an emphasis on language anyway, that is more of a CIA thing (which also recruits a lot of Mormons). It’s funny how all of the glowing traits that are claimed about Mormons that are cited as reasons to hire them always come from the perspective of other Mormons.
That being said, this is the first one that I’ve read that has slightly touched on one of the major reasons: Mormon nepotism. The Mormon Mafia talk in this article may sound like a joke, but it is very much a real phenomenon. If you hire a single Mormon, and that person achieves a position of influence in your company, you will wake up some day to the realization that there are now hundreds of Mormons...and they all had a say in hiring each other, and they all give glowing reviews about each other, and they all end up in the same organizations, and they all get promoted in lockstep with each other. The Mormon Mafia isn't an FBI thing, it is a real phenomenon that happens in a lot of different places. I got a great job out of college primarily out of Mormon nepotism. I got fired after leaving Mormonism for the same reason.
A good way to prevent this from happening is, not surprisingly, a general anti-nepotism practice: don’t allow people interview candidates from their alma mater. 99% of these asshole Mormons that try to create Mormon Mafias within companies went to BYU, and 99% of the people they want to hire at the exclusion of others also went to BYU. It works surprisingly well for non-Mormon nepotism as well...never underestimate an HBS grad's tendency to think other HBS grads are the bee's knees. Don’t let them have a say in their hiring.
> glowing traits
Nice one, if intentional
This one went over my head
1 reply →
> If you hire a single Mormon, and that person achieves a position of influence in your company, you will wake up some day to the realization that there are now hundreds of Mormons...and they all had a say in hiring each other, and they all give glowing reviews about each other, and they all end up in the same organizations, and they all get promoted in lockstep with each other.
Lots of cultures do this, different asian sub-ethnicities, Jewish people, immigrants. You know who don't seem to do it much in my experience (and should), African Americans. I am opposed to nepotism personally, but I see it happen so much that I think everyone should take a crack at it if they can.
It helps that the mormon faith is fairly harmless as far as religions go. Aside from maybe polygamy and abuse cases, there are few explicit conflicts of interests. The LDS church runs hedge funds and have a somewhat less extreme political orientation than e.g. southern baptists or Scientologists . Most Mormons actually practice the family values they preach, unlike say evangelicals.
[flagged]
9 replies →
I don't know about nepotism, but I have heard the security background were easier with mormons. If you list all mormons as references and the investigators go and ask other mormons about how good and trustworthy you are as a person, what would you expect them to say?
I would also wonder what the ratio of atheists in the organizations were compared to the general population.
> It’s funny how all of the glowing traits that are claimed about Mormons that are cited as reasons to hire them always come from the perspective of other Mormons.
I'm Jewish and have a pretty positive (in the standard ways) view of Mormons. Would have considered living in Utah if there were more of a modern orthodox Jewish community there. Can't imagine better neighbors.
The west is trying to get rid of meritocracy not realizing the only other options that have been successfully implemented by humans are nepotism and discrimination.
> The west is trying to get rid of meritocracy not realizing the only other options that have been successfully implemented by humans are nepotism and discrimination.
“Meritocracy” is just discrimination where the speaker agrees with the basis of discrimination, thus seeing it as “merit”. It isn’t an alternative to discrimination.
Best counter to workplace discrimination: more workplace discrimination.
Get an authority involved if you have proof.
It's not really discrimination to say "you have a potential bias on this particular candidate, you shouldn't be involved in the decision".
2 replies →
[flagged]
As a former Mormon myself, I think you're being ridiculous. And frankly, you sound pretty bitter and may not be the most neutral of judges.
Mormon nepotism isn't anything more than you see from other people around their things (church, schools, even sports teams). I lived and worked in Utah County of all places for years (where huge percentage of people are Mormon) and the majority try to be open minded, tolerant, and accepting. Now if you go around shitting on their most sacred beliefs or being an asshole, don't expect it not to affect their feelings toward you, just like it would any other human. I've also lived and worked in places where I was the only Mormon (or one of 2 or 3) in the whole group.
If your claim that being Mormon causes this nepotism (rather than say, just being human as I would claim), then it must be something about their faith that causes it. Where do you think that comes from? Can you point out a teaching or belief of theirs that would encourage this?
> They will always prefer hiring other Mormons, and they will use a bunch of bullshit reasons why they’re better than others as their cover.
You realize this is what all humans do right? We make decisions emotionally and then justify them rationally, even to ourselves. Frankly I find it disturbing that you advocate against actively discriminating against a group of people on that basis. You could easily s/Mormon/gay or anything else in there and it would be exactly as truthful/accurate.
Also, the "Mormon Mafia" is a joke, not an actual thing. For most it's a self-aware attempt at humor.
Just anecdotal but as someone in the Pacific Northwest with a large Mormon population I have seen this occur in government and doctors offices, slowly everyone replaced by Mormons. My current office the practitioner I work with is the only non-mormon left and he's not happy about it. Mormons look out for each other, which ends up in this situation. It's nothing more nefarious than that but still off putting to those outside the church as it very much seems like a 'Mormon Mafia'.
Side note, out of prison Mormons were the only religion that actively supported ex-cons and would set you up with a place to stay and a job if you didn't have one. I seriously thought about converting just for the stability (and still might). The Catholic church had monks come to prison but I couldn't even get a visit with a priest/monk at my previous church once outside to just talk about coming back to society, my fears, and re-adjustment. Or a single parishioner to talk with. But they did offer tele-counseling (if I had insurance).
6 replies →
While people do love to get involved in some delicious nepotism, some groups do it more.
I have worked in the same area and I have seen a team of 35 go from 1 or 2 Mormons to 30. Slowly, the less palatable personalities were let go and replaced by friendly Molly's. So it's not as ridiculous as you are proclaiming.
It's not some huge conspiracy, but it does happen. Mormons are definitely more likely to hire someone they know from their Church than most Social Groups who source candidates internally. It's not malicious...generally it's just a matter of kinship... "Oh, I heard Jeff's daughter needs a job! Bring her in for an interview!"
this is not about Mormonism at all; just "nepotism."
when I was in Google Ads in 2008, nearly all the SmartASS team were Canadian. What are the odds?
Then when I was back in there in 2017, someone told me, "Now it's only about half."
My dad also posts on online forums, claiming to also be a former Mormon while still having unrelentlessly positive things to say about Mormons. He's very much still a Mormon, much like I would expect you to be. Have some integrity. The vast majority of ex-Mormons are definitely bitter, and would love to destroy the church, and for a multitude of entirely valid reasons. The exmormon subreddit, which is the most popular and active of all of the ex-religion subreddits, can fill you in on exactly why exmormons are so bitter about their former religion if you're curious.
And you're right. All humans do this to some degree. Mormons, with their sanctimonious belief that they are the only ones that can receive revelation from god, seem to do it far more than other groups. Something about believing in the Power of Discernment...if the Bishop thinks this guy is a great guy, then he obviously is a great guy!
And you're also right that the Mormon Mafia is a joke, but it is only a joke within the Mormon Mafia. For everyone else, it is a career nightmare. If you, god forbid, go to a bar with a couple colleagues after work, you can expect to never be treated the same ever again. You'll be passed up for promotion, denied positions of responsibility and trust, and constantly have your work called into question. Because you're not trustworthy anymore...you're an alcoholic. Wouldn't it be nice if we had less alcoholics on our team? Gee, where can we find fewer alcoholics? I know...BYU!
EDIT: I should add, out of an abundance of caution due to the upset Mormons that I have just offended, that there are plenty of Mormons that are not like this. I'd probably say most mormons are not like this. One of the managers I work with most is a mormon, and he knows that I'm exmormon, and we get along fine. He also has hired 14 non-mormon people, including two muslims, a lesbian, and his top performer is an ex-heroin addict, so I'm pretty damn sure he's open minded about other people and isn't just looking to pack his org with like-minded people. I would never propose a measure to discriminate against mormons, but I absolutely would try to mitigate their tendency towards nepotism. There are enough mormon nepotists out there that it has become a problem, and I'm just calling that out.
3 replies →
> As a former Mormon myself
Or Formon, as we say in the business.
I’ll see myself out now.
So "it's okay because everyone is doing it". That also doesn't explain OP getting fired for leaving.
1 reply →
They say there's a half-truth behind many jokes...
Did I miss the percent of Mormons in the FBI mentioned? I see the 2% of US population identified, but nowhere how many are in the FBI. According the Pew Research Center[0] 1.6% of the US population is Mormon in 2014. The FBI employs approximately 35,000 people [1].
Looking at differently [2] - take the population of the US; subtract all who are not citizens, under-age, over-age, non-computer users, have no bachelors; subtract all who cannot secure a clearance, subtract all who lack the specific skills required for the role, subtract all who are not willing to take a mediocre salary, and, and, and... What do you have left?
There might be a correlation (we do not know, as we do not have a percent of Mormons in the FBI), but the factors identified are also readily present in several other groups.
I could have written an article that the US DoD hires disproportionately color-blind people. We should investigate! (I can back this up with real numbers too ;))
[0] Pew Research Center: Religious Lanscape Study https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-stu...
[1] FBI: How many people work for the FBI? https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/how-many-people-work-for-the-...
[2] US Census https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221
References moves an article from tabloid toward journalism.
> Mormon people often have strong foreign language skills, from missions overseas
I remember reading that the Mormon language school that prepares people for their overseas mission trips has a lot of Special Forces personnel from the military attending as well.
The reason: the number of languages taught at the Mormon school exceeds those taught at the military language schools. This includes dialects spoken by a tiny proportion of the global population but that population is strategically useful to some agenda of US foreign policy.
Not exactly correct. The Mission Training Center has only missionaries of the church attend for language training. But, Special Forces and many other agencies have studied and patterned their own language training off of the MTC model.
random anecdote, but the first company i worked at, most of the team/org was mormon. and to make things even weirder, the boss was also the local "bishop" so he was everybody's boss in both the secular and spiritual worlds. not sure how common this sort of thing is, but i definitely felt at a disadvantage compared to the mormon people on the team.
I'm a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
It's pretty common, but if you felt at a disadvantage compared to the members, that bishop/boss was not doing his job properly. We're not supposed to favor members, even if only slightly.
Unfortunately, it's natural to do so because there is an implicit assumption that there are shared values.
I don't know how to fix that.
Isn't there some memo from Scientology saying that they had goals to get members into such bureaucratic positions and recruit members in those positions?
I can get why the FBI may be drawn to Mormons, but I also wouldn't be surprised is the Mormons actively encouraged their members to get jobs with the FBI.
Operation Snow White, run by Scientology, was one of the largest government infiltrations in US History. I don’t see any evidence that the same thing is happening with the Mormon church though.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White
Especially since Mormons had a lot of friction with the US government in the past.
Nah. Zero messaging internally encouraging government work.
I'd say the high level of education, pro-work, pro-patriotism, high morality emphasis on top of the extra level of foreign language competency makes it a natural fit.
I was surprised to find out recently my Dad had applied to the CIA back in the 60s- but on reflection not too surprised. The more the 60s and 70s went counter-culture, the more that the Utah/AZ/Idaho axis of Mormons went from their traditional pro-Democratic post FDR base to a pro-government pro-Republican, anti-Communist direction.
He ended up going into business instead, but if his background check hadn't gone on so long, he'd likely would have taken a .gov offer if it'd come before his corporate offer.
(2015)
Sounds a bit like the "cultural fit" narrative that has been used by some FAANG companies to prefer people from certain ethnicities
Do you have any idea what you are talking about?
As someone who is seemingly not from a preferred racial demo, I know exactly what this person is talking about.
12 replies →
I do, and so do most people who have been approached by some FAANG company
TLDR: 1. Strong foreign language skills from overseas missions. 2. It's easier getting them security clearances since they don't use drugs or alcohol.
3rd mentioned in the was a willingness to serve.
Having grown up Mormon, I'd add a 4th that wasn't mentioned in the article: deference to authority. The Mormon church is a very hierarchal organization. Orders go from the top down. People lower on the ladder should not ever contradict their leaders. When a Mormon leader asks you to do something, you expected to comply. I imagine that this mindset would make you fit in well in the FBI, at least in the lower and middle layers of the organization.
3. Mormons are overwhelmingly white and come from a cultural background of conservative patriarchal Christian whiteness which comports with the historical and present culture of the FBI.
You're using Christian way too much to describe Mormons. I am pretty sure most Christians aren't going to see Mormonism as a plus.
2 replies →
You left out “heirarchical authoritarian”, but, yeah, that.
Which is funny because most Mormons I know dislike the FBI specifically because their actions as of late are directly in opposition to their beliefs.
5 replies →
This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes from Burn After Reading. From Osborne Cox when being dismissed from his job as an analyst:
> I have a drinking problem? Fuck you, Peck! You're a Mormon! Next to you, we all have a drinking problem!
I would add that their culture is a good match. They are Lawful Good through and through. Historically their church youth programs were tightly integrated with the Boy Scouts (until a recent split as BSA became more inclusive), and are raised to have a strong sense of duty to their church, country and community.
> Historically their church youth programs were tightly integrated with the Boy Scouts
In western states, yes. In the east it ran from supportive to apathetic to passive-aggressively hostile. In some councils, the split wasn't all bad for the BSA.
1 reply →
[flagged]
3 replies →
Lots of people think this means "don't smoke" or something like that.
From the members I have conversed with, they are forbidden from using caffeine.
Coffee and black/green tea are typically considered to be prohibited (I know active members who drink green tea and still participate fully), but caffeine in general isn't banned. One of the apostles even acknowledged drinking a whole lot of diet coke to help while learning to use a computer[0]:
> It took a great deal of time, repetition, patience; no small amount of hope and faith; lots of reassurance from my wife; and many liters of a diet soda that shall remain nameless.
[0] https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference...
20 replies →
The caffeine thing is a long-standing internal debate that arises from:
1. Unclear doctrinal specifics
2. An orthopraxic rather than an orthodoxic culture
The first item is that the only doctrine possibly relating to caffeine is a single verse in modern scripture that says "hot drinks are not for the body or belly". Long-standing teaching by leadership has merely narrowed down "hot drinks" to mean tea and coffee.
The second item is by far more important in the debate: Mormons are _highly_ orthopraxic, meaning that you're usually free to hold heterodox doctrinal beliefs as long as your public life and behavior reflects the common orthopraxy. Or, to put it simply, the public appearance of righteousness is culturally far more important than internal doctrinal beliefs (this is, ironically enough, not technically doctrinal). The same chapter that defines "hot drinks" (coffee/tea) as not good for the belly defines beer ("barley... for mild drinks") as entirely appropriate, but since the orthopraxic behavior is to be seen as avoiding coffee, tea, hard liquor (which is specifically called out in the same scripture) then avoiding anything above and beyond those is often seen as an increased sign of righteousness.
So you'll often have arguments between Mormons who follow the letter of the law and others who follow what they define as the spirit of the law. And since coffee and tea both contain caffeine then many Mormons will avoid caffeine as well.
You'll find this same argument about following just the doctrine defined in the open canon versus following behavioral practices above and beyond it in other aspects of Mormon life, such as: not calling members of the church or the church "Mormon," payment of 10% of monthly income (though the scriptures call for 10% of an annual "increase"), women only wearing at most one set of earrings, no dating for youth below the age of 16, men applying to serve missions the instant their 18th birthday arrives (though the window for honorable service is many years wide), no clapping in meetings, no drums or brass in meetings, and so on for many other cultural practices.
This is, as you can probably recognize from some of the items in that list, in no way a phenomenon isolated to the LDS religion, but it does inform the inevitable debate you'll hear if you ever bring up caffeine in a group of Mormons.
1 reply →
Opinions differ. Best as I can tell, like all other dogmas, their rules are some blend of urban legends, game of telephone, and calvinball.
eg The nephew of the owner, prepping for his missionary work, gravely explained to me that he has to be careful not to immerse himself in open waters (or maybe it was just moving water) past the belt line. Something about being vulnerable to witches or demonic possession or whatever. And it was totally true because his cousin's best friend knew a guy who swam while on mission and then died.
2 replies →
It depends on the family. My girlfriend wasn't allowed to drink any caffeine when she was a kid. Caffeine was normal in my family though. Coffee is pretty universally frowned upon (I don't get it either). Apparently Mtn Dew > Coffee as it pertains to health. They base their dietary standard on the "Word of Wisdom".
Source: grew up Mormon, and still have a close relationship with my Mormon family.
It's not caffeine. It's coffee, black/green tea, and alcohol. Soda has caffeine and is seen as okay.
Think of it as Jewish Kosher or Muslim Halal.
Probably something also about similar views about a moral high ground.
I get the sense that there are a lot of Mormans on HN.
Descendants of survivors of the trek to Utah carry their genes. If there is someone to be scared of it is survivors, for you know not what they did to survive.
three factors:
> "Mormon people often have strong foreign language skills, from missions overseas"
> "a relatively easy time getting security clearances, given their abstention from drugs and alcohol"
> "and a willingness to serve"
It's quite a strange religion, not to be offensive. I always get approached by them at the mall when i'm in the US...I always think to myself the kind of person is drawn to this belief around the character of Joseph Smith.
What religion isn't strange?
Seriously, the only reason you think that the religions that you're used to aren't weird as shit is overexposure.
Mormonism is more strange than most. The leader who started it was literally a traveling treasure digger in 1820's New York. He conned people out of money by going to houses and telling them that they had treasure on their property and if they paid him, he would dig it up. He was never successful, but moved from town to town doing so. He often claimed that this treasure was left by Native Americans and ancient inhabitants. The law eventually caught up to him and he was even tried in court for these accusations and admitted to the con. Just a few years later, low and behold he found ancient scriptures made of gold buried in his backyard. These were written in an unknown language ("reformed egyption", I language that scientists now say never existed), that only he could read. He translated the book which eventually became the "Book of Mormon" today, which is the baseline for most of Mormonism.
He then gained a following by claiming to speak directly to God and writing these discourses in a book called "The Book of Commandments", which the modern church has now edited down to what they still use, known as "The Doctrine and Covenants", which they believe are direct words from God. This is where strange rules like not drinking coffee, tea, and alcohol come from, which modern Mormons follow today. Funny enough, the founder didn't prescribe to any of these rules himself, in fact he was drinking heavily on the night of his death.
The leader, Joseph Smith took his followers from state to state as the nation expanded, building a larger and larger following. He was kicked out of each state due to unruly practices in that they were starting to preform, like an attempted assassination on the Missouri Governor (he was shot 4 times in the upper chest and head and managed to survive), starting an illegal bank and printing his own currency, practicing polygamy (he was married to at least 38 women that we have record of, but probably many more), and much more.
The prophet, Joseph Smith died after a newspaper ran a story that unveiled his polygamy to the world. He got his militia together and burned the printing press down. This lead to his warrant and eventual arrest. While in jail he had arranged for his militia to break him out of prison. So when they heard a mob approaching the jail where he was kept, he actually told the jail guards that his militia was coming and they didn't want to die for this. So the guards stepped aside and let the mob approach the prison, only to find that the mob was filled with angry people from town that had read about this story or who were upset with the many other things Joseph Smith had done. They approached in protest. Joseph Smith had smuggled a gun into the prison in a trenchcoat, she he started firing at them through a door, and a firefight broke out as a result, leaving Joseph Smith dead.
After Joseph Smith, comes Brigham Young who took all the Mormons to modern-day Utah to start a fresh life. From there, a whole other fascinating story begins. Including things like "Blood Atonement" (killing people to absolve them of their sins), more polygamy, The Utah War (armed Mormons fought off several bands of US Military), the Mountain Meadows Massacre (120 immigrants were killed in cold blood that were passing through Utah heading to California), and so many more that I can't get into here.
It is quite a fascinating history if you are curious. This isn't even getting into Doctrine. Much of which is a spiritual spin off Stone Masons rituals, the basis that Jesus visited the modern-day-USA after he died on the Cross in Jerusalem, a whole group of ancient Americans who traveled over from Jerusalem in 600BC, and so much more.
Its definitely different than your standard religion.
7 replies →
Christianity has lot of weird stuff. When you really start to think it over from roots and consider certain aspects. But members are just told to follow and ignore those aspects. Not to mention the stuff that is simply ignored if you would slightly expand it.
3 replies →
It's not about the character of Joseph Smith, anymore than Judaism is about the character of Moses or Catholicism is about the character of Peter.
[dead]