Tactical Morality

My friends...

I have stumbled across a bit of wisdom that I find fascinating...please do give me your thoughts on it...

Elder Neal A. Maxwell gave a talk at the Behavioral Sciences Symposium at BYU back in 1976. In this talk, he drops a tantalizingly revolutionary method of examining the commandments by which we live. He suggests that not only fundamental, eternal principles play a role in our salvation, but also that mundane, largely symbolic standards can save us as well. How so?

Elder Maxwell maintains that in order for us to be of any assistance at all in the salvation of others, we must be able "preserve our identity in the way that is most helpful to us and to our fellowmen." The preservation of this identity involves a real element of "tactical morality"--morality that is focused on not "unintentionally [assuming] the appearance of evil in its various cultural customs and dispensational dimensions." Cultural norms, therefore, become significant not because there is a law written in the heavens that, for example, we must not drink coffee or that women must only wear one pair of earrings. They are significant if only to prove that we are different from the rest. He cites Paul in 1 Cor. chpt. 7 where he instructs the sisters to keep their heads covered during prayer. Why? Was there anything inherently wrong with having the head uncovered? At the time, the cultural norm was that only women of loose morals went around with their heads uncovered. Additionally, the cultural norm had been that only men went without a head covering. Given Paul's otherwise progressive doctrines about women's roles ("All are one in Christ"), some sisters, so I've read, almost certainly began believing that they should not have to conform to the cultural standard. After all, were not all equal and should not both genders be treated similarly? Paul responded that they were missing the point: 1) removing the head covering would make them look as the adulteress if they removed their head-covering, and 2) it would constitute a symbolic blending of gender roles. This cultural norm served an important function, even if it had a limited relationship to gospel teachings.

Elder Maxwell's provides a neat answer to a number of questions as to why we keep some of the standards we do. Why do temple recommend interviews prohibit coffee while allowing numerous soda drinks to pass by? Is there something magical about the 16th birthday where suddenly the teenager becomes prepared for dating? Why not the 17th birthday? Why is it that the standards of modesty are indeed quite different from the standards of modesty in the early 19th-century? After all, if our ancestors were to see the standards of the vast majority of Latter Day Saint girls, they would bemoan the state of Zion. And yet the Church has never encouraged wearing dresses or bonnets. In fact, to ask such questions, Elder Maxwell maintains, is to miss the point in the same way the New Testament sisters did. Cultural norms DO play a role in our moral standards.

So those who wonder about why keep the standards we do...in some ways, you don't have to wonder because no one has claimed that there is anything inherent to them. It's about "preserving our identity," about being different for its own sake. I like it...it has a radical edge to it...we get all the benefits of being a straight-out non-conformist ("So why don't you party it up?" "Just trying to express myself") AND it sends a more powerful message than most other forms of non-conformity (which are far more common than what we do). Someone who's straight-out Goth might get a "well, he's just doing his own thing." But a Latter Day Saint who turns down a drink? That raises eyebrows...