Cola Drinks

[Hemidakota]

[Moksha]

I think there are some topics as perenial as the grass and will always appeal to posters. Mormons want to know about their cola options.

• The one thing the world does not need at this time are more cola wars. Every cola has its point now that Coca-Cola produces all the store brands. Man does not live by cola alone, it's just a useful adjunct.

:)

[HEthePrimate]

Yah, what I take from that article is that we should exercise judgment and temperance when deciding what to eat and drink. And that cola drinks are mild compared to energy drinks.

Hey, sugar could be considered "addictive" and has plenty of health risks, yet I don't see any LDS trying to include it among WoW restrictions!

HEP

[NeuroTypical]

Everybody sing!

Choose the Sprite!

When a Coke is placed before you,

In the Sprite,

Your Temple Rec resides!

(etc.)

LM

p.s. My Bishop told me Coke drinkers get TR's too.

[GADBabaganoosh]

Mmmm... Dr. Pepper and Pepsi, my two favorite sodas. If anything, they are worse for you because of High Fructose Corn Syrup than caffeine.

[Daniel2020]

As I've posted elsewhere, I'm an old curmudgeon with a long memory. While--to some--what follows may be part of ancient history I think it (just like D&C 89) continues to express Church doctrine:

The Priesthood Bulletin of February 1972 (volume 8, number 1) states, "There has been no official interpretation of the Word of Wisdom except that which was given by the Brethren in the very early days of the Church when it was declared that ‘hot drinks’ meant tea and coffee."

"With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided." (Clifford J. Stratton, "Caffeine--The Subtle Addiction," Ensign, June 1988, p. 60.)

Edited July 11, 2010 by Daniel2020

[Suzie]

As I've posted elsewhere, I'm an old curmudgeon with a long memory. While--to some--what follows may be part of ancient history I think it (just like D&C 89) continues to express Church doctrine:

The Priesthood Bulletin of February 1972 (volume 8, number 1) states, "There has been no official interpretation of the Word of Wisdom except that which was given by the Brethren in the very early days of the Church when it was declared that ‘hot drinks’ meant tea and coffee."

"With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided." (Clifford J. Stratton, "Caffeine--The Subtle Addiction," Ensign, June 1988, p. 60.)

Are you saying the statement is church doctrine in your opinion?

[Wingnut]

Are you saying the statement is church doctrine in your opinion?

Perhaps it does in his opinion, but the statement itself merits examination. It specifically states that "the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit" should be avoided (emphasis mine). In other words, a Dr. Pepper twice a year when you've got a migraine and you're trying to kick it probably isn't against the Spirit of the Law.

Additionally, the statement was given in 1972, and yes, in an official publication of the Church. However, all official statements made prior to 1996 have been superseded by whatever the current edition of the Church Handbook of Instructions is (currently the 2006 version). There is no statement in the current CHI regarding the consumption of caffeine or cola drinks.

I have no problem if people wish to take the above statement as official doctrine in their own lives and their own families. I have no problem if people disregard the above statement in their own lives and in their own families. The fact of the matter is that there is no current statement from the Brethren regarding caffeine or cola, which means that it is given to each person to decide for him or herself.

[crazypotato]

As I've posted elsewhere, I'm an old curmudgeon with a long memory. While--to some--what follows may be part of ancient history I think it (just like D&C 89) continues to express Church doctrine:

The Priesthood Bulletin of February 1972 (volume 8, number 1) states, "There has been no official interpretation of the Word of Wisdom except that which was given by the Brethren in the very early days of the Church when it was declared that ‘hot drinks’ meant tea and coffee."

"With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided." (Clifford J. Stratton, "Caffeine--The Subtle Addiction," Ensign, June 1988, p. 60.)

Last year I was a Sunday School Gospel Doctrine teacher. From memory the current lesson manual said this again - that the church meant tea and coffee, but also that it was not going to get too specific in what we should eat or drink. The manual told the teacher to not let the students get into discussion over specific food or drinks, but that we are just to teach the principle and then let the students decide, in their own personal lives, what to eat and drink. That the Word of Wisdom was not a difficult concept to grasp.

[Daniel2020]

Are you saying the statement is church doctrine in your opinion?

I'd rather not go off topic by quibbling over words, but since the statement regarding Cola drinks was intended by the General Authorities to clarify the Word of Wisdom--which is clearly a doctrine--I called it doctrine.

I take very seriously anything that appears in the Church Handbook of Instructions, a Priesthood Bulletin (which is a supplement to the Church Handbook of Instructions) and/or a letter from the First Presidency that is read in Sacrament Meeting. Because such things are intended by the General Authorities (speaking as one) to covey the Church's official position on a subject.

I take less seriously something in a publication like the Ensign, teacher's manual, etc. While such things clearly help us learn about the Gospel, they are usually the product of a single author who often is not a General Authority. For me, these publications just don't carry the same weight as something issued by all the General Authorities speaking as one for the express purpose of stating the Church's doctrine/position on a given issue.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Daniel2020

[Daniel2020]

Duplicate deleted. Moderators: please delete this post.

[Daniel2020]

True story, believe it or not:

I once lived in a Ward (this was prior to the 1972 Bulletin referenced above) where the Bishop denied temple recommends to those imbibing Cola Drinks. He also denied a mission call to a priest for drinking Coke.

The priest wrote a letter to David O. McKay. Who then was president of the Church.

President McKay responded by telling the Bishop such questions should not be asked in worthiness interviews. He also told the priest that in his personal opinion it was best not to partake of drinks containing caffeine.

When I was in the SLC Mission Home we were told that if while proselyting we were offered a choice between a caffeinated drink and a non-caffeinated drink we should choose the non-caffeinated drink. But if our contacts only offered us a caffeinated drink we should partake. We were told the reason was the Church did not want to create the impression in the mind of our investigators that partaking of cola drinks was against the Word of Wisdom.

(As I've said elsewhere, I'm now an old man. Perhaps things have changed in the decades following my mission. After all, back then missionaries were ordained by General Authorities and interviewed annually by a General Authority.)

Edited July 12, 2010 by Daniel2020

[Suzie]

I'd rather not go off topic by quibbling over words, but since the statement regarding Cola drinks was intended by the General Authorities to clarify the Word of Wisdom--which is clearly a doctrine--I called it doctrine.

I take very seriously anything that appears in the Church Handbook of Instructions, a Priesthood Bulletin (which is a supplement to the Church Handbook of Instructions) and/or a letter from the First Presidency that is read in Sacrament Meeting. Because such things are intended by the General Authorities (speaking as one) to covey the Church's official position on a subject.

I take less seriously something in a publication like the Ensign, teacher's manual, etc. While such things clearly help us learn about the Gospel, they are usually the product of a single author who often is not a General Authority. For me, these publications just don't carry the same weight as something issued by all the General Authorities speaking as one for the express purpose of stating the Church's doctrine/position on a given issue.

Thanks for replying Daniel. :) In that quote though, it says that the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter and then goes on and add the counsel part. But I can see why some members may see it as doctrine and others like me, do not. Thanks for clarifying your point.

[Suzie]

I am not a fan of Cola drinks (I don't buy them) if someone offers me I drink it without hesitation and I really don't have a problem with those who drink it.

[Vanhin]

True story, believe it or not:

I once lived in a Ward (this was prior to the 1972 Bulletin referenced above) where the Bishop denied temple recommends to those imbibing Cola Drinks. He also denied a mission call to a priest for drinking Coke.

The priest wrote a letter to David O. McKay. Who then was president of the Church.

President McKay responded by telling the Bishop such questions should not be asked in worthiness interviews. He also told the priest that in his personal opinion it was best not to partake of drinks containing caffeine.

When I was in the SLC Mission Home we were told that if while proselyting we were offered a choice between a caffeinated drink and a non-caffeinated drink we should choose the non-caffeinated drink. But if our contacts only offered us a caffeinated drink we should partake. We were told the reason was the Church did not want to create the impression in the mind of our investigators that partaking of cola drinks was against the Word of Wisdom.

(As I've said elsewhere, I'm now an old man. Perhaps things have changed in the decades following my mission. After all, back then missionaries were ordained by General Authorities and interviewed annually by a General Authority.)

Has not changed much. At least in our mission where I live now, the missionaries are instructed to be careful not to give the impression that other drinks besides coffee and tea (and alcohol) are a prohibited by the WoW. In fact, they often correct people who claim otherwise, including members and investigators.

They don't even elaborate on what "coffee" or "tea" means. They let the individuals decide for themselves.

Vanhin

[Hemidakota]

As I've posted elsewhere, I'm an old curmudgeon with a long memory. While--to some--what follows may be part of ancient history I think it (just like D&C 89) continues to express Church doctrine:

The Priesthood Bulletin of February 1972 (volume 8, number 1) states, "There has been no official interpretation of the Word of Wisdom except that which was given by the Brethren in the very early days of the Church when it was declared that ‘hot drinks’ meant tea and coffee."

"With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided." (Clifford J. Stratton, "Caffeine--The Subtle Addiction," Ensign, June 1988, p. 60.)

Good morning Daniel. You are one of the many members who I believe is striving to live a better life. But let address the issue of what is doctrine even if it resides in the Ensign. I do consider this, not doctrine. Why? This is his opinion of a writer and not one of the brethren. Daniel, notice the note below: Dr. Clifford J. Stratton is Doctor of Human Anatomy at the School of Medicine, University of Nevada at Reno. He lives in the Sparks Nevada Stake. Usually, if it is written by the brethren, it would state it after the title. Even FAIR.Org list this as part of the collective information concerning the WoW.

Even though, I do concur with his assessment, but what I see that is even bigger addiction than the substance called Caffeine, is white sugar. We need ask ourselves based on your statement and reference, are we going to consider anything that has white sugar be against the Word of Wisdom also? If you answer it with a yes, do you not think a living Prophet, who does drink soda occasionally, eat chocolates, and digest items with sugar content be cursed or damn? Consider soda contents, what other listed ingredients elements that is far worse than caffeine can do to our body. Many itmes we purchase off the grocer shelve have issues. Be selected in our purchases and moderation of what is consumed should always be our guide.

I welcome your opinion and striving to live a higher health code brother.

Ref: FAIR Topical Guide: Word of Wisdom

LDS.org - Liahona Article - Caffeine—The Subtle Addiction

Word of Wisdom/Hot drinks - FAIRMormon

Edited July 12, 2010 by Hemidakota

[Wingnut]

Good morning Daniel. You are one of the many members who I believe is striving to live a better life. But let address the issue of what is doctrine even if it resides in the Ensign. I do consider this, not doctrine. Why? This is his opinion of a writer and not one of the brethren. Daniel, notice the note below: Dr. Clifford J. Stratton is Doctor of Human Anatomy at the School of Medicine, University of Nevada at Reno. He lives in the Sparks Nevada Stake. Usually, if it is written by the brethren, it would state it after the title. Even FAIR.Org list this as part of the collective information concerning the WoW.

Dr. Stratton quoted the statement that Daniel posted. If you read the beginning of Daniel's post, you'd have seen that the quote he cited was originally made in a 1972 edition of The Priesthood Bulletin, a publication, I believe, written and distributed by the First Presidency.

In fact, I'm not sure why Daniel cited the 1988 Ensign article at all, since the quote he posted is not contained in the article referenced. I have personally made reference to the Priesthood Bulletin quote a number of times on this site, so I recognized it myself and didn't verify the Ensign source. Here is a slightly expanded version of that quote:

What about soft drinks containing habit-forming drugs or caffeine, such as cola drinks? Although soft drinks are not mentioned specifically in the Word of Wisdom, an official statement by the Church's leaders reads: "With reference to cola drinks, the Church has never officially taken a position on this matter, but the leaders of the Church have advised, and we do now specifically advise, against the use of any drink containing harmful habit-forming drugs under circumstances that would result in acquiring the habit. Any beverage that contains ingredients harmful to the body should be avoided."

(Priesthood Bulletin, Feb. 1972, p. 4)

[Hemidakota]

I understand but it is not current of our day.

Wingnut, as with the CHoI, it changes and items are removed by latter brethren that they feel was not inspiration or a living prophet counsel to the committee to have it removed. The priesthood manual is no different. I am sure that is what your post direction was for Daniel.

[Superbaldguy]

This is simple - if you find yourself drinking too much Pepsi or Coke (or Dr. Pepper) and it's becoming a habit, then it's time to stop or cut back. Section 89 is all about self-control and the Lord allows us to read between the lines so the Spirit guides us about dietary choices, as many are not specifically mentioned.

The Lord wants us to do some thinking on our own, at times.

If nothing else, caffeinated beverages stain your teeth and can affect sleep......Those should be two good reasons to curtail the activity.

I find sugary drinks are mostly empty calories - you can shed a few pounds if you cut them out, you won't miss it.........

[Moksha]

• The one thing the world does not need at this time are more cola wars.
• Man does not live by cola alone, it's just a useful adjunct.

I wanted to discuss these two items you posted.

First, that is a very good point. Not only are the world's warriors spread too thin as is, I am uncertain if we have ever sufficiently recovered from the last Cola War. I would invite you to consider not only the state of the world's economy, but the fact that some here continue to refer to you as "Mocks Ya". Both of these sad items could have their origin in cola or the lack of it.

Second, how right you are about cola not being the staff of life, but rather a useful adjuct. A Liahona rather than an Iron Rod, if you will.

:)

[UrbanFool]

My husband was drinking at least a 2-liter bottle of diet Pepsi every day, and he's reconsidered this on account of our church participation. Unfortunately, I now have a cupboard full of Crystal Light and I can't help but think that the Aspartame is just as bad if not worse than the caffeine. (And I won't even go into artificial colors and flavorings.) Our cupboard is looking like this:

All of those teas are herbal and contain no black or green tea.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=30879010&l=a54ea7be7a&id=1114957868

Well, picture's not coming up. Oh well.

Kelly Jensen Mullins's Photos | Facebook

Maybe you just have to click the link. This is the first time I've tried to use FaceBook for photos.

[Guest]

Guys, the word of wisdom is about your health!

It's not about cola or whatever.

If it is unhealthy, cut it out! Yes, that includes the dozen donuts, extra-large pepperoni pizza, and family size bag of doritos you stuff your face with everyday.

It's stupid to worry about Cola drinks when you're clogging your arteries with junk. Adapt a healthy lifestyle. When you do, you'll find out soon enough that Cola drinks is not as good as Apple juice or even plain H2O.

[Suzie]

Anatess, excellent points! I think as members of the Church we focus many times in some micro things but dismiss completely others. We may not drink coke but we stuff ourselves with chocolates and pastries. We may not drink coke but we eat junk food many times during the week and the list goes on. It IS truly stupid when we do these things.