Middle Way Mormonism

[carbon dioxide]

I am orthodox on some things, middle way on others and perhaps cafeteria on a few things.  I like balance. 

[MustardSeed]

58 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

In fact I think I’ve botched this thread. I’ll ask the moderators to close it and see if I can do a better job with the initial poll question.

I think you just have a tough audience

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

I am orthodox on some things, middle way on others and perhaps cafeteria on a few things.  I like balance. 

Wouldn't that make you cafeteria by definition then?

[pogi]

I’m a Latter-day Saint - Mormon of yore.  Anything else I feel is unnecessarily divisive.

I will say this though, we are all cafeteria members to some degree or another (that term has negative stigma so I don’t really like it) - some simply feast more than others.  We are all on a spectrum, and I don’t see any clear lines on that spectrum to divide into different categories of Saints.  The goal is to be one, so I find attempts to distinguish and separate into groups or classes as antagonistic to that goal.

 

Edited November 19, 2018 by pogi

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

I openly drink black tea, which makes some members uncomfortable. Somehow drinking soda like Pepsi and Mountain Dew is acceptable, but black tea is a straight ticket to hell (or a direct violation of the Word of Wisdom). 😀

What does “openly drink” mean? Why would one want to go out of the way to make others uncomfortable?

Edited November 18, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

What does “openly drink” mean? Why would one want to go out of the way to make others uncomfortable?

If someone else drinking tea makes a person uncomfortable they have serious issues.  Even if they don't believe it's permitted.

It's not even like alcohol or smoking that can effect others present.

[CV75]

A member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints!

 

[Bernard Gui]

21 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

If someone else drinking tea makes a person uncomfortable they have serious issues.  Even if they don't believe it's permitted.

It's not even like alcohol or smoking that can effect others present.

That’s not my point. 

[Scott Lloyd]

Labels in the context of membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are highly troubling in that they tend to promote divisiveness where unity ought to prevail. Christ warned, “If ye are not one, ye are not mine.” Sounds pretty severe to me. 

[Benjamin Seeker]

2 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I think you just have a tough audience

Which I could have predicted! Oops.

[Ouagadougou]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

What does “openly drink” mean? Why would one want to go out of the way to make others uncomfortable?

1.  Because it's freedom of choice and I enjoy it; I don't hide the fact that I drink black tea. If someone is so close-minded that seeing another person drink tea makes them uncomfortable, then that his his/her problem. I openly drink black tea like other members might drink Pepsi, Coke, Mountain Dew, etc., especially if it is in the comfort of my OWN home or when I go out to eat.  

2.  I don't go out of my way to offend someone...it's more like some members go out of their way to get offended.  I'm not going to change a personal health-related choice just to make someone else feel "comfortable."  I don't drink soda or engery drinks (which are allowed under the WoW)--and I feel much healthier when I drink just tea.  

3.  I think getting offended over someone drinking tea is about as ridiculous as getting offended that someone eats the lemon Starburst.  

4.  I don't think it's a sin or that God cares.

 

 

[CV75]

3 hours ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

In fact I think I’ve botched this thread. I’ll ask the moderators to close it and see if I can do a better job with the initial poll question.

Lurkers ( Posted 3 hours ago  )probably won't answer the survey. That aside, rather than labels, I recommend describing the cohorts in terms of what you think are the distinguishing features. (kind of what you tried to do, but could probably improve upon, here: ( Posted 5 hours ago )

[RevTestament]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I'm a middle-wayer, staying on the fence or in the middle is not as horrible as we've been told, IMO. It's not prudent to just jump to either side when not ready, that would be a waste of time to explore all the options. Faith isn't always blind, nor should it be. No one gave me the information to make a proper decision when I turned eight and then the course was to get baptised, as a child I didn't know the full story, the rest of the story. I joined under false pretences, IMO. 

Also, I've always wondered how many on here that debate and are apologists for the church if they themselves were ever middle wayers that found their way back after a faith crisis. I'll bet it's more than we all think it is.

I thought I might respond. You know a little about me. I went inactive for a number of years - not because I didn't believe in the Church, but because I didn't feel I completely understood the atonement. I sorta returned for awhile, but it was a half-way thing. I didn't tithe or fully participate. That is not really the heart of my character. At my heart I'm a 100% type of guy. Once I fully accept something, I devote myself to it - it's not a half way thing. 

I consider myself to be an apologist, but it is not really an apologist for "the Church." I am an apologist for the restored gospel. As you can probably tell from my post, I do not always defend past actions of the Church nor its leaders. I call it like I see it. So, If I am defending them, it is because I believe it 100%.

I really like our current stake president. Today he spoke to us about giving talks, and pointed out that sometimes what we say can damage others - their testimony, etc.  Why did he need to give this talk? Because the Church is not perfect. We are all still learning from one another. What you see in Church history is that the Church has not been perfect. When you compare that against a sterilized version of Church history, it can cause some discordance - which I know you went through. Learning that the Church is not perfect can be disconcerting when you have been taught that it is from your childhood. It is kinda the adult version of Santa Claus. However, all that doesn't make the restored gospel untrue. Even knowing the faults of the Church at large, I still love the restored gospel, and have complete faith in it. It is possible. I wouldn't go to any other Church, because I know they don't have the fullness of the gospel - or that potential anyway. 

[Rich Hansen]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Labels in the context of membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are highly troubling in that they tend to promote divisiveness where unity ought to prevail. Christ warned, “If ye are not one, ye are not mine.” Sounds pretty severe to me. 

From my perspective, active members who self identify as orthodox, middle way, cafeteria or other are Christ's.  I think you might be saying they are not.

BTW, the church labels membership all the time, including describing members as active, in-active, less-active, worthy, endowed, unendowed, valiant, struggling, faithful, tithe-paying, non-tithe paying,  part-member family, recommend holders and non recommend holders, to name a few.

Who are those that are "one" with Christ?

[Benjamin Seeker]

2 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I thought I might respond. You know a little about me. I went inactive for a number of years - not because I didn't believe in the Church, but because I didn't feel I completely understood the atonement. I sorta returned for awhile, but it was a half-way thing. I didn't tithe or fully participate. That is not really the heart of my character. At my heart I'm a 100% type of guy. Once I fully accept something, I devote myself to it - it's not a half way thing. 

I consider myself to be an apologist, but it is not really an apologist for "the Church." I am an apologist for the restored gospel. As you can probably tell from my post, I do not always defend past actions of the Church nor its leaders. I call it like I see it. So, If I am defending them, it is because I believe it 100%.

I really like our current stake president. Today he spoke to us about giving talks, and pointed out that sometimes what we say can damage others - their testimony, etc.  Why did he need to give this talk? Because the Church is not perfect. We are all still learning from one another. What you see in Church history is that the Church has not been perfect. When you compare that against a sterilized version of Church history, it can cause some discordance - which I know you went through. Learning that the Church is not perfect can be disconcerting when you have been taught that it is from your childhood. It is kinda the adult version of Santa Claus. However, all that doesn't make the restored gospel untrue. Even knowing the faults of the Church at large, I still love the restored gospel, and have complete faith in it. It is possible. I wouldn't go to any other Church, because I know they don't have the fullness of the gospel - or that potential anyway. 

Thanks for sharing. I didn’t really know your story.

[RevTestament]

37 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

Thanks for sharing. I didn’t really know your story.

No man knows my history...

     (Just messin' with ya...)

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

1.  Because it's freedom of choice and I enjoy it; I don't hide the fact that I drink black tea. If someone is so close-minded that seeing another person drink tea makes them uncomfortable, then that his his/her problem. I openly drink black tea like other members might drink Pepsi, Coke, Mountain Dew, etc., especially if it is in the comfort of my OWN home or when I go out to eat.  

Oh. "Openly drink" means in the privacy of your home or at a restaurant, but not at a ward social?

Quote

2.  I don't go out of my way to offend someone...it's more like some members go out of their way to get offended.  I'm not going to change a personal health-related choice just to make someone else feel "comfortable."  I don't drink soda or engery drinks (which are allowed under the WoW)--and I feel much healthier when I drink just tea.  

I have a close friend (LDS) who always drinks the green tea when we go out for sushi or pho. It's has never offended me. Who is offended by your practice and how is that manifested? Do they say, "You are going to hell" or "That's offensive to me?" If you are drinking it in your home or in a restaurant, how do they even know?

Quote

3.  I think getting offended over someone drinking tea is about as ridiculous as getting offended that someone eats the lemon Starburst.  

I would have to agree with that. I would draw the line at the licorice Necco, though.

Quote

4.  I don't think it's a sin or that God cares.

Disobedience is not a sin? How do you know God doesn't care? 

Edited November 19, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

19 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

No man knows my history...

     (Just messin' with ya...)

The Shadow knows.

[Glenn101]

9 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I am an orthodox believer.  But that's different from being a TBM.

Labels. I really do not care for them. I label myself as TBM in some posts. But I am really a life long member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that was converted by a profound spiritual experience. I do not really know Oor care) how else to describe me.

Glenn

[Waylon]

Middle Way sounds pretty good to me.  I feel a little uncomfortable around both those who are too liberal regarding the Church AND those who are too conservative (or at least those who loudly proclaim their viewpoints either way and are judgmental about it).  I feel best around middle of the road Mormons who are believing and trying but who aren't weird about it.

Edited November 19, 2018 by Waylon

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Rich Hansen said:

From my perspective, active members who self identify as orthodox, middle way, cafeteria or other are Christ's.  I think you might be saying they are not.

BTW, the church labels membership all the time, including describing members as active, in-active, less-active, worthy, endowed, unendowed, valiant, struggling, faithful, tithe-paying, non-tithe paying,  part-member family, recommend holders and non recommend holders, to name a few.

Who are those that are "one" with Christ?

Well, Jesus describes those who are one with him...the sheep and the goats; the chicks under the wing and those who refuse to get under; those at the Tree of Life and those in the Great and Spacious Building; the five wise virgins and the five foolish virgins; the man whose house is built on the rock and the man whose house is built on the sand; those who have faith, repent, are baptized by water and the Holy Spirit and those who don't; those who keep his commandments and those who do not; those who take his name upon them and those who do not; those who are hot, cold, or lukewarm; those who follow him and those who don't; those who make covenants with the Father and those who don't; the wheat and the tares; those who take his flesh and blood worthily and those who do not; those who have been washed clean and those who remain in their sins; etc., etc.  

How do these things fit within the spectrum of orthodox, middle way, cafeteria, or other?

Edited November 19, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I thought I might respond. You know a little about me. I went inactive for a number of years - not because I didn't believe in the Church, but because I didn't feel I completely understood the atonement. I sorta returned for awhile, but it was a half-way thing. I didn't tithe or fully participate. That is not really the heart of my character. At my heart I'm a 100% type of guy. Once I fully accept something, I devote myself to it - it's not a half way thing. 

I consider myself to be an apologist, but it is not really an apologist for "the Church." I am an apologist for the restored gospel. As you can probably tell from my post, I do not always defend past actions of the Church nor its leaders. I call it like I see it. So, If I am defending them, it is because I believe it 100%.

I really like our current stake president. Today he spoke to us about giving talks, and pointed out that sometimes what we say can damage others - their testimony, etc.  Why did he need to give this talk? Because the Church is not perfect. We are all still learning from one another. What you see in Church history is that the Church has not been perfect. When you compare that against a sterilized version of Church history, it can cause some discordance - which I know you went through. Learning that the Church is not perfect can be disconcerting when you have been taught that it is from your childhood. It is kinda the adult version of Santa Claus. However, all that doesn't make the restored gospel untrue. Even knowing the faults of the Church at large, I still love the restored gospel, and have complete faith in it. It is possible. I wouldn't go to any other Church, because I know they don't have the fullness of the gospel - or that potential anyway. 

Like! 😊

[sunstoned]

10 hours ago, Ouagadougou said:

I openly drink black tea, which makes some members uncomfortable. Somehow drinking soda like Pepsi and Mountain Dew is acceptable, but black tea is a straight ticket to hell (or a direct violation of the Word of Wisdom). 😀

There are two people that I personally know from the local ward that drink black tea.  Both are honest in their recommend interviews, and both have current recommends.  Both the current bishop and the previous bishop (who is a friend of my mine) sign their recommends.  My friend once told me that he would not keep anyone from attending the temple over a morning beverage. 

Edited November 19, 2018 by sunstoned

[Ouagadougou]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Oh. "Openly drink" means in the privacy of your home or at a restaurant, but not at a ward social?

I have a close friend (LDS) who always drinks the green tea when we go out for sushi or pho. It's has never offended me. Who is offended by your practice and how is that manifested? Do they say, "You are going to hell" or "That's offensive to me?" If you are drinking it in your home or in a restaurant, how do they even know?

I would have to agree with that. I would draw the line at the licorice Necco, though.

Disobedience is not a sin? How do you know God doesn't care? 

Some family members are offended, but it is their own choice.  I feel God doesn't care based on how I feel when I drink tea, as opposed to when I used to drink soda and energy drinks; it is MUCH healthier, IMO, but it just doesn't align with what the church wants.  Plus, probably 95% of the world drinks tea/coffee (my estimation). I see it as a religious taboo similar to how some don't eat pork or beef.  BY and JS (along with other early leaders) didn't obey the WoW, and if God doesn't change, why would he care today?      

I don't see it as disobedience; rather, I view it more as a church superstition and think it's nonsense personally that the Savior would mind if someone drinks black tea, but is fine with doing WAY more damage to the body by drinking soda and eating fast food.  In other words, I don't view it as a commandant from God, but a ridiculous, arbitrary rule from the church.  

[Ouagadougou]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

There are two people that I personally know from the local ward that drink black tea.  Both are honest in their recommend interviews, and both have current recommends.  Both the current bishop and the previous bishop (who is a friend of my mine) sign their recommends.  My friend once told me that he would not keep anyone from attending the temple over a morning beverage. 

And here we have bishop roulette; some bishops will allow it, while others might be against it.