MrStakhanovite wrote:Sorry little girl, but your parents are only confusing you. It's an either/or proposition, you can't be both.
Thoughts?
You trolling me, Stak?
Religious self-identity is more than just theological consistency. It's a sense of belonging, of "this is who I am." For my own part, growing up in an areligious household and having bounced around from denomination to denomination throughout my teens and early 20s, I didn't feel like I had much sense of belonging to anyone. "Evangelical mutt" was what I called myself. It was only a few years ago that I realized that "evangelical mutt" could be its own identity, and that led me to an entire denomination of evangelical mutts (i. e. the Evangelical Covenant Church).
Back to Brooks' family though. It's true that Mormonism and Judaism have contradictory theology. So does Mormonism and Catholicism, Protestantism and Catholicism, etc. Pretty much any two faiths which make distinctive truth claims are going to be at least somewhat contradictory.
Then again, faith traditions often make claims within themselves that are contradictory. A person does not stop being Mormon because they choose to accept the tension of "equal partners" and "preside" in the Family Proclamation, nor does a Christian stop being a Christian for believing in the Trinity or the hypostatic union. Why should a self-proclaimed Jewish Mormon cease to be a Jewish Mormon for believing in both Yom Kippur and Mormonism?
Even if one maintains that, theologically, a person can only be Jewish or Mormon and not both, pragmatically, those girls are going to absorb a lot of their identity from both their Jewish father and their Mormon mother. In that sense, they are going to be "Jewish Mormons." I've talked to enough interfaith families to know that it's pretty common for children raised in both faiths to identify as both. For my own part, I don't see a problem with it.