posted
If it was a "time of winter", which I read to mean a time when produce and other foods are unavailable and you really can't have a healthy diet without meat, then I'd eat meat. Posts: 700 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Different people have different nutritional needs. I'm happy you've found a diet that works for you. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have much to add that hasn't been said. However, there is no such thing as a "non-Orthodox" Mormon in the sense of what you mean with Jews. First and foremost, a non-orthodox Jew can be a specific movement with its own notions of what it means to be a Jew in the modern world. For a Mormon there is no such equivalance, as it is more about life choices in opposition to "orthodox" Mormon practice and doctrine. With many non-orthodox Jews it can be about interpretation, while with Mormons its about not doing what you know should, or vis-versa.
As with organizing into actual movements, the only "liberal non-orthodox" Mormonism to develop was the Reorganized (now Community of Christ) LDS Church. The purpose of that organization was to become more Mainline Protestant, although with little success. Any other "offshoots and breakoffs," and there are many, have been of an even more restictive nature. Most of those have been in regards to polygamy.
The reason for this is actually easy to understand. The very specific belief in Priesthood and its Authority is not easy to throw away. In order to develop a new Mormon movement you would have to declare a new Priesthood Dispensation, the true heirs of the old one (as the polygamists usually express), or reject the religious significants altogether. That last choice doesn't give much prospect of creating a religious organization. There is, however, a name that has developed for that last one: Cultural Mormon. Your "drinking friend" would be closer to what is called a Lax-Catholic.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's interesting. What things would he consider culturally Catholic rather than just culturally Christian? *thoughtful*
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He means that he grew up going to church, was in the choir, was an altar boy, went to parochial school, and while he does not currently hold all beliefs of the Catholic Church as true (he's not much on organized religion; I'm not sure he'd even self-identify as "Christian"), he does value his study of the teachings of Christ, who he considers a great teacher of many truths, and occasionally attends Mass at a church where he enjoys the homilies by a particular priest, especially on holidays, more to feel the fellowship than anything. He enjoys jokes and stories that only other people who grew up Catholic would "get", and values it as part of his upbringing in general.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:As with organizing into actual movements, the only "liberal non-orthodox" Mormonism to develop was the Reorganized (now Community of Christ) LDS Church . . . Any other "offshoots and breakoffs," and there are many, have been of an even more restictive nature. Most of those have been in regards to polygamy.
There are actually four "Mormon" denominations that are large enough to be listed in the Handbook of Denominations in the United States. The smaller three all were founded in the late 1800s and rejected polygamy from the beginning, while TCoJCLDS was still practicing it.
TCoJCLDS is the only one over 500,000 members, though.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting. What are they, dkw? I think the only break-offs we ever really hear about here in Utah are the little polygamist groups. Makes sense that they'd be in the news more, though.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
1) The Church of Christ (Temple Lot), which was founded in 1867. They moved en masse to Missouri in 1867 and took posession of the land there dedicated by Joeseph Smith for a temple.
2) The Church of Jesus Christ (Bikertonites), founded in 1862. A break-off from the followers of Sidney Rigdon, a Pennsylvania Mormom who refused to go west with Brigham Young.
3) The Community of Christ, formerly Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, founded in 1860. They believed that Joseph Smith's son was his sucessor, rather than Brigham Young.
and of course
4) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Which you would know a lot more about than I do. Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe I should have stated only viable liberal religious breakoff. The other ones you mention are practically in limbo. And, as was mentioned, the RLDS isn't doing so hot either.
posted
I went to school with several Mormons in Montana, none of whom were what's been referred to as "orthodox". The catholic counterpart to what they are is called "Christmas and Easter" parishioners.
They referred to themselves as "Jack Mormons". I've never heard the term before or since, but it was pretty widespread in the Northwest. It is basically a person who's LDS in name only. Born into the faith, but doesn't adhere to all of the rules. I don't think they belonged to the local ward, or if there even was a local ward. They drank beer (although they weren't big drinkers, you could tell) and they drank soft drinks. They had some strange practices, but I don't know if they were belief driven or just personal choices.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think Sidney's spinoff is. The one I mentioned is a spinoff of his spinoff. They didn't move with him to wherever it was he moved in 86. (My Handbook is at home.)
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Jack Mormon" is a common term in the LDS Church to refer to people like you just described. Drinking soft drinks isn't notable, though; they're not forbidden like alcohol, coffee, and tea are.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why are soft drinks allowed but coffee and tea aren't?
The restriction in our scriptures is against "hot drinks", which has been clarified by our leaders to mean coffee and tea.
That it's all about the caffine is conjecture. Even though it's a pretty commonly held belief, it's not doctrine.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I remember correctly, Jack-Mormons were originally non-Mormons who helped the saints during the years of persecution when Joseph Smith was still alive.
Over the years it has evolved into Mormons who believe but do not attend church regularly. Jack Mormons still basically believe the church, but either feel disenfranchised or apathetic towards the church or its practices/commandments/policies.
They should not be confused with Mormons who have left the church but don't feel the motivation to go through the process to remove their name from the church records. Technically such non-believers are still a Mormon, but they don't believe. If a person like that were too drink alcohol and not go to church, I don't think they would be considered a Jack Mormon.
Those who have left the church but are still on the roster are probably called inactives or apostates.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
lem -- I think that the term Jack Mormon can apply equally to somebody who believes and doesn't follow or somebody who doesn't believe but hasn't had their name removed.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cold tea is still tea, and hot chocolate is neither, but I'm also confused about the translation of the phrase "hot drinks". The church leadership decided what it meant? What did they base that translation on?
I know that for believers it isn't as important to always understand as it is to comply, but it seems a little contradictory to me.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not a translation. Joseph Smith wrote "hot drinks" in the Doctrine & Covenants, and later Church presidents clarified that it meant coffee and tea. That's how our church works. We believe in continuing revelation, so the current leadership always trumps past statements.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:The church leadership decided what it meant? What did they base that translation on?
It's not a translation -- the original revelation was given in English.
Whad did they base their interpretation on? Revelation. As a prophet, seer, and revelator, the president of the church is authorized to interpret (or receive) scripture for the entire church.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know it was in English before; translation doesn't have to involve more than one language, although it typically does. "Clarification" would have been a more appropriate word choice.
What does the current leadership say when asked why certain drinks are alright? Is there something specific about the fundemental makeup of all coffees and teas that one should avoid? Obviously not the caffeine, as soft drinks are permitted. And not the temperature at which they are served, what with the hot chocolate and cold tea example. I don't drink coffee or tea, so I imagine I'd be fine with the LDS rules. Not that the denominations I'm more familiar with don't have lots of...strange requirements. I'm just curious if you're allowed to ask for further clarification or if you're just supposed to do as they say.
I don't mean to offend anyone, and I'm not trying to start a flamewar, so if I'm overstepping some boundaries just let me know. I will say that my incessant asking of the question, "Why?" is the main reason why I and organized religion don't get along. I like for things to have a reason to them, and that's not always allowed.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I honestly don't see the point in asking why other drinks are okay. They're okay because they aren't not okay. There's certainly nothing wrong with asking, but I don't believe there's really a reason other than "God said so." I think it's mostly a matter of faith.
Of course, just because soft drinks aren't forbidden doesn't mean we should drink them with reckless abandon. Our leaders encourage moderation and common sense. Caffeinated soda might not be forbidden, but I do think it's often a good idea to avoid it.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:What does the current leadership say when asked why certain drinks are alright? Is there something specific about the fundemental makeup of all coffees and teas that one should avoid?
AFAIK, we have not been given further clarification.
quote:Obviously not the caffeine, as soft drinks are permitted.
No, it's not obvious. Many members don't drink caffinated drinks because they believe that it is the caffine.
quote:I don't mean to offend anyone, and I'm not trying to start a flamewar, so if I'm overstepping some boundaries just let me know. I will say that my incessant asking of the question, "Why?" is the main reason why I and organized religion don't get along. I like for things to have a reason to them, and that's not always allowed.
Feel free to ask "Why". It's certainly allowed.
Just as long as you don't mind when we say "I don't know" a lot. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
I wouldn't accept that, but I understand taking things on faith.
And of course just because something is allowed doesn't mean you can gorge yourself on it. I never implied that, nor do I believe it. I don't drink soft drinks, but that's purely for health reasons.
And if soft drinks are permitted (as Jon Boy indicated they were) then caffeine is obviously not forbidden. Not a great idea to take in a lot of it, but allowed. Or is that a judgement call?
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Anyway, I heard the no soda rule was lifted when the Mormon Church bought Pepsi.
You heard wrong.
quote:I wouldn't accept that, but I understand taking things on faith.
I wouldn't expect anybody to believe any revelation from our prophets unless they already believed that they were prophets.
If you believed that our leaders were prophets, I doubt you'd have much problem with it.
quote:And if soft drinks are permitted (as Jon Boy indicated they were) then caffeine is obviously not forbidden. Not a great idea to take in a lot of it, but allowed. Or is that a judgement call?
It's up to each member to decided on their own what they think about that. Many members believe that caffinated drinks are against the Word of Wisdom (the revelation that the prohibition agasint coffee and tea comes from), many others don't.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:What does the current leadership say when asked why certain drinks are alright? Is there something specific about the fundemental makeup of all coffees and teas that one should avoid?
I don't think they say anything about the "whys." I have heard from Mormons (so this is just interpretation) that the reason is because of the concentration of caffeine and other chemicals like tar in coffee and tea.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, as I understand it, didn't Joseph Smith himself later clarify that the Word of Wisdom revelation referred to Coffee and Tea?
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure who it was that clarified it. To us, it doen't really matter matter, since Brigham Young and all the other presidents of the church down to the present day are all just as much prophets as Joseph Smith was.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, out of interest, does a person become president of the LDS church because he is a prophet, or does he aquire the powers of prophecy when chosen as president?
Or is it a kind of predesitination, "we don't percieve time like God does" thang?
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by jebus202: So, out of interest, does a person become president of the LDS church because he is a prophet, or does he aquire the powers of prophecy when chosen as president?
Or is it a kind of predesitination, "we don't percieve time like God does" thang?
Well, sort of. Unlike with the Papacy, the President of the Church is voted and elected in conclave. The Senior Apostle (the Apostle who has been an apostle the longest, not the oldest), who, along with the rest of the Apostles, already holds all of the 'preisthood keys' in a sort of dormancy, when sustained as President of the Church, has those Preisthood Keys of Authority come into activity.
This individual becomes The Prophet, and becomes the authorized individual to receive revelation on behalf of the entire Church. It's all very, very orderly.
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
