Another issue is that most of Europe has or has had a state religion, and an active and overt participation outside of that religion made public life difficult. That has changed in the last 20 years in many parts of north-western Europe, but the residue of discrimination will take a generation to wear off. We have a very senior lawyer in our ward who says she could not have dreamed of her current government position fifteen years ago.

the US is much more of a meritocracy where one’s ability (rather than color, sex, religious affiliation etc) counts for a lot. getting ahead in Europe is all about one’s class. people will only hire those who behave and look like them. sure, this happens stateside too, but to a much lesser extent.

as for the mission thing. i finished A levels wanting to serve a mission. i didn’t go when i was 19 because my family are not LDS and wanted me to go to uni. so, i did their bidding and went to uni for 3 yrs. once i was finished though, i put in my papers. i served a fantastic mission in italy which i can definitely say was the best experience of my life.

but this is how the UK system was, at least back in the mid 90s. my final year of uni i applied to law school, specifically, the inns of court law school in london – which at the time was the only school in england for the training of would-be barristers. i sat a day long multiple choice entry exam and attended two interviews. i was accepted to the school – 1 of only about 800-1000 people out of all the law grads in England to get in. i was also offered a scholarship to cover half the tuition fees. however, the desire to serve a mission burned deep and as my final year at uni came to an end, i decided to submit my papers. my bishop told me i would need to save up X amount of money before i could leave, which i did and am proud of.

the problem was this – i graduated in july 94, but didn’t leave for the mission until the next may (95) (the time it took to save money and get in my papers, plus the prep time between call and departure) – that meant that i would not be able to attend the inns of court law school until Sept 97! and i’d applied in early 94 to begin in Sept 94! a 3 (not 2) year gap. i asked the school for a deferal and they said i could have up to 1 year only. that didn’t work, so i chose the mission instead – what a great choice that was.

i reapplied when i came back (since it could not be done while i was on the mission) but this time they were not interested. i ended up doing odd jobs for 2 years to save up the money to attend BYU law school and came here in late 99.

here in the US i still get asked why i took a 5 yr gap between undergrad in the UK and law school here (esp by prospective employers). when i explain it was because i did an LDS mission i nevertheless get funny looks, even by older RMs, who all think that we can just finish school, do a yr at uni, go straight on a mission, and then be back in school, with about a 2 and a 1/2 yr gap at the most. it amazes me how many US based potential missionaries are not asked to take time out to work to save up money to go on a mission.

i’m proud of what i did, but even LDS employers here seem suspicious of the non traditional more than 2 yr gap.

it’s not as easy and straightforward for us in the UK. but you know what, we make the sacrifice and do it.

If one were to include solicitors, and those non-lawyers holding law degrees,additionally including those currently pursuing law degrees, I would be genuinely surprised if there were not at least a hundred individuals who fall within one of these categories currently active in the Church.

Given that there are probably only 35,000-40,000 active members over the age of twenty-one I think that’s quite impressive. On the other hand, perhaps we should be grateful that the numbers are not much greater (do we really want a Church full of lawyers?!).

In terms of university teaching…I think the numbers of members in the UK who have taught/are currently teaching at university-level is more likely to be counted on three or four hands, than on less than one. However, I have not heard of any UK-born and raised members who have attained full professorships there. Some have done so at BYU. For example,Noel Owen,Prof. of Chemistry, the late Arthur Henry King, Prof. of English, and Peter Bates,Prof. of Mathematics (who I believe is now at Michigan State; I do not know what his current relationship with the Church is).

Also, I believe I read somewhere that Prof.Fred Buchanan,well-known in Mormon history circles, a formerly at the U of U was born in Scotland.

I could go on (there is a thesis waiting to be written by someone on the emergence of a Mormon middle-class in the UK), but suffice to say, if one looks at the occupations declared by RM’s living in the UK on the above mentioned site what is striking is: the number of schoolteachers, Police Officers, Engineers,and those working in IT, that are listed.

Hellmut was in a Burschenschaft

Actually, John, I am not a member of a Burschenschaft but of a Corps. The Burschenschaft is an organization with nationalist commitments. Admission requires at least one German grandparent. That is not the case for Corps.

The tolerance principle is the foundation of the Corps. Membership is independent of religion, ethnicity, political, and ideological orientation. You need to attend a university that awards a doctorate.

The Corps are at once the most traditional and the most liberal fraternities. They uphold the “conservative priniciple” in that they give satisfaction in matters of honor. They are liberal in the sense of emphasizing personal freedom.

Members of Corps are ideologically quite diverse. Prince Bismarck was a Corps-student and so was Heinrich Heine.

In light of these differences between Corps and Burschenschaften, may be, my membership makes more sense to you.

In some ways, this is not dissimilar to a fraternity in the United States.

Yes, American and German fraternities share some Masonic roots. There are two differences, however, that give the experience a different quality.

First, there is a different selection process. American fraternities create hardship by requiring members to mistreat each other. Corps select members by requiring them to fence against outsiders.

Because academic fencing requires a fixed distance, it is called mensur (Latin: mensura=distance). The mensur creates a bonding experience. In light of the shared experience of fear, personal differences become almost meaningless. It puts things into perspective.

Among other differences, the generation gap secedes. It’s not just friendship for life but also across generations.

Second, German fraternities do have much more active alumni. That moderates behavior and provides for greater continuity with respect to corporate identity and behavioral code.

Are you saying that if you had remained an active, temple-going Latter-day Saint the mates in the Burschenschaft would still have loved you just as much despite your odd religion?

That’s exactly what I am saying. That is what Corps are all about, the tolerance principle.

At the time, I was a temple-going Latter-day Saint. I might have been despondent after returning from the full time mission but I was active. Among other things, I was ward mission leader and gospel essentials teacher. We baptized over thirty people that year, one of whom became a bishop in Lagos.

My Corps-brothers were not concerned about me being Mormon. Nor did they mind that I did not drink. I established clear expectations the first minute I met them and it has not been a problem.

I suppose you meant the comment about “reciprocating” to be a dig at the Church.

I can see why you would think that but I didn’t.

I was thinking about working on campaigns and citizen committees where you can get rewarded but you have to hassle not only for the cause but also for yourself. In the Corps that isn’t necessary . . . at least not in my case.

Of course, if one requires immediate reciprocity then it’s not about community but merely another market interaction. That describes many campaigns. On the other hand, no community can survive systemic exploitation and free riding. Corps work in that respect.

That’s an indicator of a quality organization that recruits and produces thoughtful and considerate individuals.

Finally, I was surprised to see you making a point of how “underprivileged people” join the Church.

Hadn’t you enquired about the careers of Mormons in Europe then I would not have made the point. In the context of your question, that’s a relevant observation. Unless we control for people’s initial position, an inter-Atlantic comparison of careers makes no sense.

That seems out of character for you.

You only see one aspect of me at the bloggernacle. I am not only member of a fencing fraternity but also an army officer. My father and my grandfather were officers. (My five year old son reported, however, that he will not become a soldier because he might die.)

I am a conservative in the sense of Count Tocqueville and Dietrich Bonhoefer. I am a liberal in the sense of Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, and Lord Acton.

Though I do understand that individual sacrifice is necessary in the service of a greater good, I do not subscribe to the notion of American conservatives that an organization’s rights trumps human rights.

Humans are mammals. We are an altricious species, meaning that our offspring requires nurture, which cannot be consistently provided unless political institutions support children and parents. Therefore social democracy can make essential contributions to public policy.

I also understand that rent seekers will abuse the nurturing properties of the state and find libertarian concerns in that regard legitimate.

Whether a polity needs to move into a social democratic or libertarian direction is a matter of context. It depends on the particular shortcomings of a state at a given time.

That has been the conservative position held by men as disparate as Bismarck and Bonhoeffer. It is no accident that both were Corps students.

Hellmut, mostly I wish you’d forgive your mission president and come back. But after that, I wouldn’t mind hearing more about being a Mormon in that setting. Far out.

Thanks for your good wishes, Jonathan.

I did not leave the LDS Church over mission problems.

The reason I am mentioning the mission experience is that for some of us, it has been a career buster for reasons other than opportunity costs.

I am not bearing a grudge against my mission president. It’s not his fault that I and other Germans have had bad experiences. The causes are institutional and cultural. It’s not about individuals but a systemic problem.

As for coming back, I only left Mormonism when I found out about the September Six. Punishing scholars for their work is neither compatible with my values nor my obligations.

While this choice was not about me, it did have the salutary effect that I could finally make sense of my experience. Given that my friends from young men’s have arrived at almost identical interpretations of their own mission experiences, I am fairly confident about my conclusions.

But I think many of us in many European countries have hopes and are planting the seeds for a more enabled newer generation of LDS people to make a difference in our respective societies, even while others consider that courtship rather than scholarship drives European member interaction (BTW, IMO that was such an inconsiderate comment, Hellmut…).

I am sorry for being inconsiderate, Rascal. I did not look at it as either or. I just wanted to describe pan-European Mormon interactions. Ronan said there were none. I said that there is a little bit among young adults.

When I was a young adult, courtship was important to me. It’s a huge problem for active Mormons. Hence I did not consider that people might interpret my statement as denigrating.

Roberts is now sadly too old, and McMurrin is too scandalaized by, well, being Sterling McMurrin. Madsen is awesome, but I haven’t seen a general ovierview of all mormon theology by him, though I haven’t looked very hard. As for your books, I keep saying I will, I just haven’t yet :)