Molly Mormon, Peter Priesthood

[Guest]

I think everyone knows that "Molly Mormon" and "Peter Priesthood" are derogatory terms, pointed toward people who follow the "cookie cutter" (also derogatory) stereotype of doing everything "right" in Mormonism. (I've also seen it used in reference to hypocrites who make it look like they are doing everything "right", but away from the public eye they are different... this one I don't have a problem with, but it's also not the usage I'm thinking of here.)

When did it come so bad to try your best to do what we're told? Especially among each other. If a woman serves where she's asked, does her VT outside of showing up once a month, goes to the temple regularly, and heaven forbid does some home canning or family history, does she deserve the sneers of her fellow saints, as they bitterly call her "Molly Mormon"? Why is following counsel bitterly looked on as mindless conformity?

It is possible to still be your own person and have a strong mind while doing these things. It is possible to exercise your agency by doing what we've been asked to. But it seems that negativity and cynicism are more in vogue. 

I hate the cynicism around us. I hate that people make a hobby of criticizing each other even in (and often because of) our efforts to do right. I hate the assumption that those who are anxiously engaged are assumed to be fake, or putting up airs, when I believe that most often people are anxiously engaged because they have a testimony, and/or conviction that there are good reasons we're counseled to do these things. Do we remember the 13th Article of Faith? Are we seeking after the good in each other, or trying to find fault?

I was thinking about this last night, and found something Pres. Uchtdorf said in April:

Quote

Pride exaggerates its own strength and ignores the virtues of others. Pride is selfish and easily provoked. Pride assumes evil intent where there is none and hides its own weaknesses behind clever excuses. Pride is cynical, pessimistic, angry, and impatient. Indeed, if charity is the pure love of Christ, then pride is the defining characteristic of Satan.

Pride may be a common human failing. But it is not part of our spiritual heritage, and it has no place among holders of the priesthood of God.

 

It sounds like one root he gives of this problem is pride. Where else do you suppose this negativity that seems to thrive between us might come from?

 

Edited August 7, 2016 by Eowyn

[LeSellers]

1 hour ago, Eowyn said:

If a woman serves where she's asked, does her VT outside of showing up once a month, goes to the temple regularly, and heaven forbid does some home canning or family history, does she deserve the sneers of her fellow saints, as they bitterly call her "Molly Mormon"? Why is following counsel bitterly looked on as mindless conformity?

I suspect it's a kind of jealousy, or defensive ploy: I'm not doing that, and she isn't any better than me, so she must be "cheating" somehow.

That's the better of two explanations. The other is those who call people this kind of name are not converted, and imagine everyone else to be a hypocrite, the same as they are.

Lehi

Edited August 7, 2016 by LeSellers

[Hemisphere]

There is nothing wrong with doing things right. However you find those terms mostly aligned with people who are a) sanctimonious or b) people who wnat to impress their lifestyle on others in a very obtruding fashion. I for one make a distinction between faithful mormons and "lifestyle"- mormons. We try to shun the latter because we dislike the judgement for not wanting to chime in and homogenize into this ... excrescence of living faith. Mostly also, people feel that "molly mormons" and "peter priesthoods" like to steamroll and suppress people that did not grow up in those church strongholds. People in that category rarely engender good will.

Edited August 7, 2016 by Hemisphere

[Guest MormonGator]

I've only vaguely heard the term but I didn't know it was offensive. I think it's because people wrongly assume "Molly Mormons" or "Peter Priesthoods" to be incapable of thinking for themselves? I can see why people would be offended by it. 

To be clear-that is not what I think of anyone, but I'm fairly confident that's how people who use the term classify those they are speaking of. Again, that is not my opinion of orthodox LDS. 

[Guest MormonGator]

My only concern with a Molly/Peter type would be if (key word, if) they become arrogant or self righteous all the time. That's not the way to relate to others. If you don't care how investigators or other members view you, than sure-be that way. But being arrogant or self-righteous is also sinful. 

The good news is I don't see it much. In fact, I think LDS are incredibly hard on themselves. I wish I could give the overwhelming majority a hug and tell them how wonderful they are as people. 

[Guest MormonGator]

My only concern with a Molly/Peter type would be if (key word, if) they become arrogant or self righteous all the time. That's not the way to relate to others. If you don't care how investigators or other members view you, than sure-be that way. But being arrogant or self-righteous is also sinful. 

The good news is I don't see it much. In fact, I think LDS are incredibly hard on themselves. I wish I could give the overwhelming majority a hug and tell them how wonderful they are as people. 

[yjacket]

1 hour ago, Eowyn said:

I think everyone knows that "Molly Mormon" and "Peter Priesthood" are derogatory terms,

I think part of the problem is right there.  I certainly don't think of MM and PP as derogatory terms; more of a euphemisms for the typical woman or man in the Church. How it is said is much more indicative of a derogatory term vs. the actual word. 

[estradling75]

8 minutes ago, yjacket said:

I think part of the problem is right there.  I certainly don't think of MM and PP as derogatory terms; more of a euphemisms for the typical woman or man in the Church. How it is said is much more indicative of a derogatory term vs. the actual word. 

Have you ever heard it used in "real life" where it was not meant as derogatory?  If so then you have done better then me.  In discussions like this we can examine it back and forth and say their is nothing wrong with it.

But i have never see/heared it used in practice other then as some kind or derogatory put down.

 

 

[Guest MormonGator]

14 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Have you ever heard it used in "real life" where it was not meant as derogatory?  If so then you have done better then me.  In discussions like this we can examine it back and forth and say their is nothing wrong with it.

But i have never see/heared it used in practice other then as some kind or derogatory put down. 

@estradling75-I bet if you were a lifelong LDS and were heavily involved in the church it would be  insulting. Sorry you have to deal with it. 

[estradling75]

10 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

@estradling75-I bet if you were a lifelong LDS and were heavily involved in the church it would be  insulting. Sorry you have to deal with it. 

Same question to you...   If you have heard it used for reals?   And if so was it ever not intended to be insulting?

[yjacket]

32 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Have you ever heard it used in "real life" where it was not meant as derogatory?  wn.

 

 

Yes, I have and do. Quite frankly, what other term would you like others to use for the "typical LDS man/woman" besides saying "typical LDS man/woman".  Language gives us spice and saying MM or PP adds a little more spice than just saying "typical LDS man/woman".

What is or isn't derogatory is entirely in the connotation not in the actual word used.

Edited August 7, 2016 by yjacket

[Guest MormonGator]

8 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Same question to you...   If you have heard it used for reals?   And if so was it ever not intended to be insulting?

No, I've only vaguely heard the term. Most of my friends aren't LDS. The ones that are would never call me that nor would I call them that. 

I take that back. I probably WOULD call a few of them that in jest. Most of my LDS friends have good senses of humor and would take it well. They tease me all the time, so it's a dish it out and take it thing. 

 

Again though, just t be clear-I can see why you'd think it was insulting and I'm sorry you have to deal with it. 

Edited August 7, 2016 by MormonGator

[Guest]

I used to have the attitude of rolling my eyes at Peter Priesthoods and all that (which is kind of silly, since I was never really a "Jack Mormon" or whatever - I was just anti-social and not super enthusiastic).  Then, I realized I was being super prideful, missing out on some good relationships, and disappointing my Father in Heaven, so I repented and I am changing my attitude.  

Why did I do it?  I don't know - one of my "natural man" tendencies is hostility towards, well, just about everyone I don't personally know and like.  Are you rich?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as a snob.  Are you poor?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as low class.  Are you Republican?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as a crazy conservative.  Are you a Democrat?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as a crazy liberal.  You get the picture.  Fortunately, I realized this attitude was not a good one to have, as, after getting to actually know people, I have seen that almost everyone is, at their core, a good, honorable person with something (and oftentimes many things) to like about them.  Moreover, after having a child, I realized that God loves everyone on this world the way I love my daughter, and that is reason alone to not harbor random angry feelings towards these people and to be charitable and take care of others.

So, long story short, I have been really working over the last 5 years or so at eliminating hostile feelings towards others, particularly over something silly as someone is "too righteous" or whatever.  

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

I used to have the attitude of rolling my eyes at Peter Priesthoods and all that (which is kind of silly, since I was never really a "Jack Mormon" or whatever - I was just anti-social and not super enthusiastic).  Then, I realized I was being super prideful, missing out on some good relationships, and disappointing my Father in Heaven, so I repented and I am changing my attitude.  

Why did I do it?  I don't know - one of my "natural man" tendencies is hostility towards, well, just about everyone I don't personally know and like.  Are you rich?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as a snob.  Are you poor?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as low class.  Are you Republican?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as a crazy conservative.  Are you a Democrat?  Without knowing you well, I would write you off as a crazy liberal.  You get the picture.  Fortunately, I realized this attitude was not a good one to have, as, after getting to actually know people, I have seen that almost everyone is, at their core, a good, honorable person with something (and oftentimes many things) to like about them.  Moreover, after having a child, I realized that God loves everyone on this world the way I love my daughter, and that is reason alone to not harbor random angry feelings towards these people and to be charitable and take care of others.

So, long story short, I have been really working over the last 5 years or so at eliminating hostile feelings towards others, particularly over something silly as someone is "too righteous" or whatever.  

 I really admire your ability to look inward at yourself and work to change this. That is super admirable of you. Wow! 

[estradling75]

38 minutes ago, yjacket said:

Yes, I have and do. Quite frankly, what other term would you like others to use for the "typical LDS man/woman" besides saying "typical LDS man/woman".  Language gives us spice and saying MM or PP adds a little more spice than just saying "typical LDS man/woman".

I have never heard it used as a replacement for "typical LDS man/woman" only to label and individual as atypical.

 But no matter it is clear we have wildly different experiences on the subject...  I then have to wonder whose type experiences is more common for the "typical LDS man/woman"

[zil]

I have only heard the terms used negatively.  If I've heard them actually directed at someone since my teen years, I don't remember it.  From those years, an example of use would be:

Mormon Friend: "Want a Coke?"

Me: "I don't drink Coke."

Mormon Friend: "Don't be such a Molly Mormon."

3 hours ago, Eowyn said:

When did it come so bad to try your best to do what we're told?

Shortly* before Satan and his followers where cast out?  (Where "shortly" must be defined from an eternal perspective rather than mortal.)

3 hours ago, Eowyn said:

... and heaven forbid does some home canning ...

  People do that! (Just teasing - really I just wanted to use that emoji.)  On a slightly more serious note, once you've got your home inside the can, how do you get in and out? (OK, there was no seriousness in that at all.)

3 hours ago, Eowyn said:

It is possible to still be your own person and have a strong mind while doing these things. It is possible to exercise your agency by doing what we've been asked to.

Yes and yes.  And I think this is one which sometimes gets subtle criticism from inside the church, and often from outside.  I do not have to go and read material written by enemies of the church, or even factual histories depicting the details of Joseph Smith's flaws, and experience that "opposition" or "doubt" before I can know with absolute, 100% certainty* that Joseph Smith is a prophet.  (*Some will even find fault with my absolute certainty, claiming I cannot know, that I really just believe strongly, as if they were inside of me and could know whether I know.  I tell you, I know.)  One does not know the things of the Spirit by analytical analysis of competing viewpoints, nor only through overcoming opposition.  One knows the things of the spirit by revelation (JST on v11 required).

3 hours ago, Eowyn said:

It sounds like one root he gives of this problem is pride. Where else do you suppose this negativity that seems to thrive between us might come from?

I think pride does not always look like we expect pride to look, and yet, I think it's probably pride all the same (if we consider the prideful behaviors in that quote from President Uchtdorf).  The suspected motivations I'm about to describe are, I think, not always conscious, but learned and applied subconsciously: some people need to pull others down to feel better about themselves. some are too lazy to work that hard and therefore must find fault in working hard so that they can feel like there's nothing wrong with their own laziness.

I say, if someone is mocking you as a Molly Mormon, be exceeding glad.

[mirkwood]

18 minutes ago, zil said:

I have only heard the terms used negatively.  If I've heard them actually directed at someone since my teen years, I don't remember it.  From those years, an example of use would be:

Mormon Friend: "Want a Coke?"

Me: "I don't drink Coke."

Mormon Friend: "Don't be such a Molly Mormon."

 

Good example.  That is the only context I've heard it used.  It has always been intended to be derogatory in my experience.  I had a co-worker call me a peter priesthood because I am active in the church.  It was intended in a mocking manner.  Of course in my total peter priesthoodedness, I told this now anti-Mormon that we would welcome him back if he was so uncomfortable with his choice to leave the church. 

Edited August 7, 2016 by mirkwood

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Good example.  That is the only context I've heard it used.  It has always been intended to be derogatory in my experience.

To be honest, if you, @zil and @estradling75 all have negative experiences with the word it's probably indicative of the word being a pejorative in most cases. 

[Guest MormonGator]

dupe

Edited August 7, 2016 by MormonGator

[NeuroTypical]

The labels sure commonly found in non-LDS and former LDS critical circles.  They usually don't mean them as compliments, although maybe one in twenty uses the labels with a certain fondness.

[Anddenex]

Very interesting, this week I had the same conversation with my wife. Molly Mormon and Peter Priesthood are often interchanged with the notion of being self-righteous. When did it become self-righteous to do the right thing, or seek to better oneself? President Uchtdorf is right, pride is at its root. We should be rejoicing when someone is trying to do what is right, not belittling, but unfortunately this is not the case.

[Guest MormonGator]

21 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Very interesting, this week I had the same conversation with my wife. Molly Mormon and Peter Priesthood are often interchanged with the notion of being self-righteous. When did it become self-righteous to do the right thing, or seek to better oneself? President Uchtdorf is right, pride is at its root. We should be rejoicing when someone is trying to do what is right, not belittling, but unfortunately this is not the case.

I think people who use the term assume that the "Molly/Peter" types are self-rigetous or judgmental without realizing that they who are using the term are being... judgmental.

Again, not what I believe just an assumption on the behavior of those who use the term. 

[Traveler]

13 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Very interesting, this week I had the same conversation with my wife. Molly Mormon and Peter Priesthood are often interchanged with the notion of being self-righteous. When did it become self-righteous to do the right thing, or seek to better oneself? President Uchtdorf is right, pride is at its root. We should be rejoicing when someone is trying to do what is right, not belittling, but unfortunately this is not the case.

If in addition to being active in the Church – if someone is also in great physical condition because they eat clean and healthy (no sugar little carbs) and work out regularly.  Then at church social function, they turn down unhealthy snacks – would they not be criticized in some hearts?  Also add to that – that they are financially well to do having spent a life time of disciplined saving and investments.   How are such members viewed????

Heaven forbid that such an individual or couple would ever offer anyone good sound advice about anything of personal improvement.  Even worse – if their children are all active and good examples – obviously something deep below the surface is very wrong!!!  Who is not anticipating with glee for the first flaw to show up.

I am describing my own parents.  And as soon as I could I moved from Utah to Maryland where no one knew my parents or would compare me to them or expected me to work in my father’s business.  Not so I could be less active just for once myself.  I wonder – maybe this is the reason so many of us were anxious to fall and be on our own in this life. And when we come to our senses it is so good to go back home and realize we have been missed.

 

The Traveler  

Edited August 8, 2016 by Traveler

[Guest MormonGator]

I have (compassion/sympathy for lack of a better word) for Peter/Molly types because it's a tough situation. It is damaging to your spirit if you go from "upholding values" to self righteous arrogance and looking down on people. Combine that with playing the martyr card and acting like everyone is crucifying you for doing the right thing is also wrong. You also may relate well to other church members-but not to converts or investigators.  I know for sure that if my first experience in the church was with someone who was overly preachy or sanctimonious there wouldn't have been a second experience.

[omegaseamaster75]

I am familiar with the terms. I view and use those terms for those who are more concerned with the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law.

WOW is one example, President G.B.Hinkley said once that we do not consume caffeine.  Next thing I get to hear about at church is how we don't drink coke because the prophet said so. Another one, no alcohol while cooking....drives me bananas....so basicly you can't go out to eat ever to a nice resturant? Or if you do your "that" guy.  My nephew has an uncle who will not allow caffeinated drinks in his home, but he eats steak at every meal, loves his chocolate, is severely overweight...but guess what he is a temple recommend holder. The guy who walks out of a PG-13 movie because there was to much skin or to many swear words...honestly where does this guy work/live? In the real world people swear and women dress for other women, in tight revealing clothing, does he walk around with blinders on all day and ear plugs in?  In fairness I really don't have a problem with someone walking out of a movie because they found it offensive, my issues is with their need to tell me about it during open mic Sunday and wear it like a badge of honor kind of a "hey look at me and how righteous I am".