On June 26, the official student publication of Brigham Young University-Idaho, known as Scroll, published an article entitled “Diversity in Discipleship.” Written by Gracie Romero, the article calls upon the campus and administration of BYU-I to hold more events and celebrations of the different cultures presented on campus, claiming that the Church should create new wards to represent each of the languages spoken natively on campus. Backing this claim, one student from the article states, “You can’t live in your own mindset. You have to embrace other people’s mindset.” The author herself states that the only way for BYU-I to be a “place of refuge” is if the campus “embrace[s] cultural diversity.”
But, is it BYU-I’s job to create a place for every culture that walks through its doors?
As much as the Scroll article aims to equate the school’s mission with secular principles of diversity, the two are incompatible. The school does not exist to affirm and create a space for every culture that walks through its doors. Instead, it exists to foster spiritual growth grounded in two preexisting cultures on campus: a discipleship in Christ and the Spirit of Ricks.
The call for structural change is a recurring theme throughout the article, as it advocates for more language-inclusive wards and increased activities to celebrate the different cultures present on campus. This call implies that BYU-I is not properly inclusive if it does not actively segment itself into identity-based groups. This approach undermines the gospel-centered approach the university aims to establish. These subcultures on campus might fulfill calls for representation and inclusion, but they weaken the unity and shared purpose that is the core of the University. One quote from the article describes the culture of the people of Rexburg as a “little bubble,” and asserts that they need to leave their “little bubble” to experience the cultures of more diverse individuals. Ironically, the real “little bubble” is the one advanced by individuals who desire to separate themselves from the “bubble” of BYU-I in some way.
Imagine a scenario where BYU-I implements the suggestion of separate language-specific wards. Spanish, Korean, Tagalog, or other languages form new wards that further separate the student body from one another. Would this promote the mingling of cultures, or promote self-contained “bubbles” that rarely mingle? Church wards do not act as cultural retreats but rather as communities in our local area where we share a faith in Christ and a desire for discipleship. With English being the most commonly spoken language on the BYU-I campus, wards should be English-based; those students whose native language is not English or who otherwise view themselves as part of a different culture than the one present on the BYU-I campus should be encouraged to embrace the culture of Rexburg. The Scroll article uses the cliche that “recognizing these differences doesn’t divide us; it strengthens us.” Diversity in the form of more segmented subcultures does not strengthen or unify us; instead, it further divides us. If you want less division and more unity, you need to advance a unified culture.
Another disappointing aspect of the piece is that the article’s opening pitch is an anecdotal story attempting to demonstrate prevalence of racism on campus, in a section titled “How racism impacts students on campus.” An anonymous source shares an example of a racist slur thrown at them, and another source shares that the “differences between her culture and that of her roommates made it difficult for her to be herself in her own home.” Interestingly, the article states that the school’s response to this student was that “[BYU-I] can’t do anything about changing someone’s way of thinking.”
The article uses these two examples to implicitly provide evidence to claim that BYU-I is racist or unsafe for these students. This connection is, of course, unfair and unfounded. Two anonymous stories do not make a campus racist. Furthermore, as Public Affairs Communication Manager Perry Rockwood rightly affirms with his quote in this section, racism contradicts the core teachings of the Church and the University. BYU-I cannot be judged simply by the accounts of two anonymous individuals. Neither can these incidents be used to call for an institutional overhaul on campus with the sole aim of “cultural diversity.”
The article frames the student who had a cultural clash with a roommate as an administrative failure. Yet, does not this example demonstrate true diversity in action, specifically the diversity of thought? The expectation that the school should control its students’ thoughts is unrealistic and constitutes a form of ideological coercion that occurs on other campuses nationwide. The correct solution in this case is a compromise between the two girls, one that doesn’t let a culture win out on the grounds of diversity.
BYU-I is already a refuge from the world. This place is so different from the people I used to be surrounded by in my hometown in Tennessee. But when I moved here, I did not bring with me the expectation that the University should carve out a little space of home for me. Instead, I expected to conform to the existing culture and expectations. I would embrace what it means to be a student at BYU-I and strive to have the Spirit of Ricks. In a similar manner, missionaries, when they move across the world to share the Gospel, do not make landfall and then expect the country they are serving in to carve out a little piece of home for themselves. Instead, they are doused in the culture and embrace it as they make friends and serve the people.
More than a century ago, President Theodore Roosevelt faced the challenge of addressing the nation’s unity. Theodore warned in his paper titled “True Americanism” in the Forum Magazine that: “[W]here immigrants or the sons of immigrants do not heartily and in good faith throw in their lot with us, but cling to the speech, the customs, the ways of life, and the habits of thought of the Old World which they have left behind, they are out of place.” Though speaking of America, Roosevelt’s words ring true even on a BYU campus. Institutions should not mold themselves for every new group, but instead, newcomers must adapt. My suggestion to students struggling with loneliness or disconnection due to being separated from the “bubble” they once were in? Embrace the new “bubble.”
BYU-I or any of the other BYU campuses are not places of refuge because they can mimic the culture you once lived in. They are places of refuge because of the culture already formed there, which is based on the teachings of Christ and Gospel principles. Fragmentation may ease your homesickness, but this strategy risks turning BYU campuses into patchworks of separate cultures, instead of a unified community striving for Zion.
Written by: Jax McKinney
Senior Contributor at the Cougar Chronicle
The Cougar Chronicle is an independent student-run newspaper and is not affiliated with Brigham Young University or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Cover Photo Source: Jax McKinney
Discover more from The Cougar Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
