Cafeteria Mormons

[_Runtu]

I'd be a cafeteria Mormon if I could find something palatable on the menu.

I'm fairly picky myself, yet I have been able so far to find enough to maintain some semblance of faith, which suits me. I find myself throwing more and more into the garbage disposal though.

I hope you and Liz (and Rollo and moksha and Jason) know that I admire you for making it work. Sometimes I wish I could.

[_Jason Bourne]

Harmony,

Your argument would have full merit if it had the approval of the leadership of the Mormon church.

But it does not.

The leadership is quite fine with it as long as you do not publish book, create a scene at Church and try to lead others astray. And actually, I have found one can have a variety of views on a sundry Old Testament topics and discuss it openly.

Your argument is summarily rejected by them on a regular basis. They (the church) do not teach your doctrine.

She did not teach any doctrine. She proposes a simple solution. Most members pick and choose anyway. Hell, how many alleged TBMs are great home teachers or magnify callings. I bet I do better than most who stand and bear solid testimonies every month in practicing what the Church asks.

To the leadership (and to many TBM's), your kind will always represent the wolves in sheep's clothing. And when they discover you they will attempt to take from you what they believe is not rightfully yours to keep.

Like what?

Rant all you want. You are your own church

I do not think Harmony is the on ranting here.

[_Jason Bourne]

I'd be a cafeteria Mormon if I could find something palatable on the menu.

I'm fairly picky myself, yet I have been able so far to find enough to maintain some semblance of faith, which suits me. I find myself throwing more and more into the garbage disposal though.

I hope you and Liz (and Rollo and moksha and Jason) know that I admire you for making it work. Sometimes I wish I could.

Well I think pretty highly of you as well and respect where you are at. While you have pretty much checked out you maintain a reasonable approach and are not a raving loon like some are. Someday I hope you buy you lunch or something.

[_John Larsen]

I have never met anyone who wasn't a cafeteria Mormon. The fact is, it is logically impossible to not be one. The Church has issued so many "dishes" that were either contradictory with others, impossibly high, or flat-out make believe that you could not function any other way then as a cafeteria Mormon.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

I think everyone outside Colorado City is a cafeteria Mormon. If a TBM accuses you of being a cafeteria Mormon, ask them if they believe the flood was global or local, or if Adam and Eve were leteral or figurative, or if the Book of Mormon took place across N and S America, or in a limited part of Mesoamerica. No matter what they answer to each of these questions, you can find another TBM somewhere that will answer the opposite. They are choosing which things to accept and which to reject.

[_BishopRic]

I have never met anyone who wasn't a cafeteria Mormon. The fact is, it is logically impossible to not be one. The Church has issued so many "dishes" that were either contradictory with others, impossibly high, or flat-out make believe that you could not function any other way then as a cafeteria Mormon.

Much truth to this...and my experience is that when I meet a Mormon one-on-one and let them know I'm an exmo, almost invariably they say something like, "well, I don't believe a lot of it, but it's a good way to live and raise my family..."

[_Blixa]

I have never met anyone who wasn't a cafeteria Mormon. The fact is, it is logically impossible to not be one. The Church has issued so many "dishes" that were either contradictory with others, impossibly high, or flat-out make believe that you could not function any other way then as a cafeteria Mormon.

Ha! I never thought of that...but it's true in that sense, isn't it?

I have no ultimatum to issue to posters like harmony, Jason, et. al. I find their positions interesting and have a great deal of sympathy for them as individual choices. At the same time, though, I do see a contradiction between this flexible and forgiving practice and an institution which is rigid and authoritarian. My worry is that ultimately the principled buffet patron ends up supporting and legitimating a repressive franchise.

I don't want to say that the church is worse now than ever (clearly "the reformation" was its low point so far) but it has been on an increasingly conservative tack since around the mid 70's. I think one can make a case that there was, briefly, a marginal place for, and a mini-tradition of, the principled dissenter in recent Mormon history. I think that has been foreclosed now, and whether it can return I don't know.

I have yet to go through the work of John Dehlin (I keep meaning to) and when I do I think I'll have something better to offer as a critique (and by critique I don't mean dismissive criticism or denunciation but a historical explanation and analysis that attempts to account for the strengths, limitations and potential consequences of the object of study).

[_Inconceivable]

Jason, Harmony, Bishopric and all.

There was a time when many of us were only familiar with faithful history. Those that are still within that cocoon are taught to view Mormons that think outside the Mormon box as apostates. There is very little grey area to pick and choose. Or did you forget your own history?

Apologists or even so called "internet Mormons" are an altogether different animal - that's not who I'm speaking of here.

General authorities preach black and white regardless of what they know. You can't share your grey beliefs as a set apart instructor without being asked to forbear or being released. What is so difficult about understanding what they think of you if they know what you think?

It doesn't matter to them what you think of yourselves or each other. They have their own definitions in that ethnocentric world of theirs.

I know I ruffle feathers with this observation, but I used to be a faithful history TBM. Now I am not, but I still know how they think.

[_Jason Bourne]

Jason, Harmony, Bishopric and all.

There was a time when many of us were only familiar with faithful history. Those that are still within that cocoon are taught to view Mormons that think outside the Mormon box as apostates. There is very little grey area to pick and choose. Or did you forget your own history?

Apologists or even so called "internet Mormons" are an altogether different animal - that's not who I'm speaking of here.

General authorities preach black and white regardless of what they know. You can't share your grey beliefs as a set apart instructor without being asked to forbear or being released. What is so difficult about understanding what they think of you if they know what you think?

It doesn't matter to them what you think of yourselves or each other. They have their own definitions in that ethnocentric world of theirs.

I know I ruffle feathers with this observation, but I used to be a faithful history TBM. Now I am not, but I still know how they think.

Go back and read what I said and you will see that I agree with you mostly in that one cannot really be a vocal cafeteria Mormon and main issues. To rail about JSs polyandry for example and take the side of a William Marks or Law, or to talk about the wrangling and the political posturing and difficulties surrounding the succession of Joseph Smith and noting that the clean way the Church teaches this just ain't so might get one in some deep do do. But to participate and enjoy what one loves, and can enjoy without ruffling feathers can work and such I think are welcome. It does not work for everyone, but it does for some.

I just get tired, like Harmony, of being told be believe and ex believers, like you, that we are lousy fools for so doing.

[_Yoda]

I just get tired, like Harmony, of being told be believe and ex believers, like you, that we are lousy fools for so doing.

Agreed. Especially when it seems to be the folks on forums like this one who do this. I would think that the folks here would have a broader understanding of where we're coming from. Maybe not.