Culture Traditions verses Doctrine


Traveler
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't claim it is doctrine. I suggest that the symbolism is found in our scriptures.

I wonder - thinking that to understand doctrine - we need to understand the symbolism. To understand symbolism we need to understand the culture.

I am thinking that understanding doctrine is like trying to see individual trees without loosing touch with the forest. Using the right hand analogy - it is believed in many ancient cultures that to be left handed was evil. In fact the term sinister means left handed. It is also believed that Satan is left handed (prefers using his left hand).

Another example is the number 13. In Northern European Pagan culture the G-dess Freya was associated with the number 13 and the Friday day of the week. In fact Friday is named after her in our culture. Thus when Friday fell on the 13th of the month it was considered a good and lucky thing. But the Christians came along and hated the symbolism of Freya and changed the Friday the 13th to a bad and evil thing. That is why Friday the 13th symbolizes bad luck in our culture. It is an outgrowth of culture hatred.

It is interesting that what the "traditional Christians" did to Pagans - the same methods of culture hatred are putting Christian symbolism and culture under attack.

This introduces a new thought - how much of opposition and attack on doctrine is focused on culture and symbolism?

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think that often "it's just culture" can be used as a good excuse to skirt the rules.

Good point, and sometimes that's true, but the problem is that the "rules" aren't always clear and are often driven by the culture. For example, wearing white shirts to pass the sacrament. When did this become the norm? Is it a rule that a young man must wear a white shirt to pass the sacrament no matter where in world he is? No. The church handbook recommends that white shirts be worn but they are not required and that a priesthood holder should not be denied the opportunity to pass the sacrament just because he is not wearing a white shirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that often "it's just culture" can be used as a good excuse to skirt the rules.

But are there times when changes ought to be considered specifically because it's culture. How much of our worship service developed by earlier Church leaders trying to set us apart from other denominations (specifically Catholics)? Should we hold to all those things we've adopted into our culture to set us apart just because it's the way we've always done it?

That's the thing about culture that often irritates me. "It's the way we've always done it" gets associated with "The way it has to be," stifling any creativity or novelty in how we address problems with individuals and wards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, like anything it can be taken too far either way. But if I have a question and don't get a definitive answer for a time, I'd prefer to err on the safe side in the meantime.

Either way, in the culture vs. doctrine dilemma, it's a great time to turn to counsel in the Book of Mormon:

Moroni Chapter 7:

Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

18 And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged.

19 Wherefore, I beseech of you, brethren, that ye should search diligently in the light of Christ that ye may know good from evil; and if ye will lay hold upon every good thing, and condemn it not, ye certainly will be a child of Christ.

Edited by Eowyn
add something
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point, and sometimes that's true, but the problem is that the "rules" aren't always clear and are often driven by the culture. For example, wearing white shirts to pass the sacrament. When did this become the norm? Is it a rule that a young man must wear a white shirt to pass the sacrament no matter where in world he is? No. The church handbook recommends that white shirts be worn but they are not required and that a priesthood holder should not be denied the opportunity to pass the sacrament just because he is not wearing a white shirt.

When President David O. McKay said, as quoted by Elder Holland, "a white shirt contributes to the sacredness of the holy sacrament."

Here are some other quotes to be aware of regarding white shirts:

CES Fireside 2004 - Christofferson

White Shirts:

I am not going to say much about the dress. We are not a people who look to formality, certainly we do not believe in phylacteries, in uniforms, on sacred occasions, but I do think that the Lord will be pleased with a bishopric if they will instruct the young men who are invited to administer the sacrament to dress properly. He will not be displeased if they come with a white shirt instead of a colored one, and we are not so poor that we cannot afford clean, white shirts for the boys who administer the sacrament. If they do not have them, at least they will come with clean hands, and especially with a pure heart.

I have seen deacons not all dressed alike, but they have a special tie or a special shirt as evidence that those young men have been instructed that "you have a special calling this morning. Come in your best." And when they are all in white I think it contributes to the sacredness of it. Anything that will make the young boys feel that they have been called upon to officiate in the Priesthood in one of the most sacred ordinances in the Church, and they too should remain quiet, even before the opening of the meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder - thinking that to understand doctrine - we need to understand the symbolism. To understand symbolism we need to understand the culture.

I am thinking that understanding doctrine is like trying to see individual trees without loosing touch with the forest. Using the right hand analogy - it is believed in many ancient cultures that to be left handed was evil. In fact the term sinister means left handed. It is also believed that Satan is left handed (prefers using his left hand).

Another example is the number 13. In Northern European Pagan culture the G-dess Freya was associated with the number 13 and the Friday day of the week. In fact Friday is named after her in our culture. Thus when Friday fell on the 13th of the month it was considered a good and lucky thing. But the Christians came along and hated the symbolism of Freya and changed the Friday the 13th to a bad and evil thing. That is why Friday the 13th symbolizes bad luck in our culture. It is an outgrowth of culture hatred.

It is interesting that what the "traditional Christians" did to Pagans - the same methods of culture hatred are putting Christian symbolism and culture under attack.

This introduces a new thought - how much of opposition and attack on doctrine is focused on culture and symbolism?

The Traveler

Yes, parables, symbolism and metaphors have always been a stumbling block for people who cannot see with their "right eye". The key is understanding the significance of the symbol before developing an opinion about it.

The right eye is symbolic of spiritual perception, as in Zechariah 11:17 "17 Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened."

Ecclesiastes " 2 A wise man’s heart is at his right hand; but a fool’s heart at his left." ... there are many examples of the right and left hand symbolism in the Bible, as has been stated. This may also have to do with the symbolism of the direction in which the Lord will return at the second coming from the East. And the waters of life from the house of the Lord flow to the right while facing eastward. And the glory of the Lord flows into the house by the East gate.

I think the issue is to understand the intent of the symbolism without letting the tradition be more valuable than it's intended message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its interesting to see how diplomatically receptive, this forum, or this topic is, considering everytime I have been involved with this discussion in person, it becomes an exercise in someone questioning another's faith.

What seems to happen is that people look for symbolism in tradions that were established based on practicality or one persons wishful thinking. Ask that person where the traditional practice originated and it is rare to get a straight answer.

The white shirt example is the most obvious example of tradition, being confused as doctrine. Tradition, needs to be questioned, when it impedes spiritual thinking, by ostracising or rejecting simply based on our expectations of continuity or perception.

Facial hair, does not change worthiness, the colour of a shirt, does not change worthiness. Bowing your head and closing your eyes during the whole Sacrament, does not change your worthiness. For some, it may help, but for most, I think its a quest to conform to some traditional ideal or better yet, keep up with the Jones. Its like looking for garment lines, or prayer "language", or the pioneer inferiority syndrome, or that the Aaronic Preisthood is reserved only for 12-18 year olds, or you must fold your arms to pray, or you shake hands and it could go on and on.

I would rather have a ragged, dishevelled beggar, serve me Sacrament, because I know, that beggar has the confidence in his worth, to withstand the unspoken and sometimes spoken harsh judgements that are thrown their way for the simple reason that they don't conform to our expectations of tradition.

How many new members do we lose, because a festering culture of tradition is fostered, rather than a doctrine of welcome? It seems to be, a lot of traditions are face value and are accepted as such, because its far easier to judge based on perception, than to use Christ like acceptance and compassion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its interesting to see how diplomatically receptive, this forum, or this topic is, considering everytime I have been involved with this discussion in person, it becomes an exercise in someone questioning another's faith.

What seems to happen is that people look for symbolism in tradions that were established based on practicality or one persons wishful thinking. Ask that person where the traditional practice originated and it is rare to get a straight answer.

The white shirt example is the most obvious example of tradition, being confused as doctrine. Tradition, needs to be questioned, when it impedes spiritual thinking, by ostracising or rejecting simply based on our expectations of continuity or perception.

Facial hair, does not change worthiness, the colour of a shirt, does not change worthiness. Bowing your head and closing your eyes during the whole Sacrament, does not change your worthiness. For some, it may help, but for most, I think its a quest to conform to some traditional ideal or better yet, keep up with the Jones. Its like looking for garment lines, or prayer "language", or the pioneer inferiority syndrome, or that the Aaronic Preisthood is reserved only for 12-18 year olds, or you must fold your arms to pray, or you shake hands and it could go on and on.

I would rather have a ragged, dishevelled beggar, serve me Sacrament, because I know, that beggar has the confidence in his worth, to withstand the unspoken and sometimes spoken harsh judgements that are thrown their way for the simple reason that they don't conform to our expectations of tradition.

How many new members do we lose, because a festering culture of tradition is fostered, rather than a doctrine of welcome? It seems to be, a lot of traditions are face value and are accepted as such, because its far easier to judge based on perception, than to use Christ like acceptance and compassion.

I am not sure of the spiritual advantage there is in being disrespectful of other cultures and traditions - especially if we understand others could find offense in our action. If that is our intent - is not their recoil the very purpose that we make our disrespect known?

But then there is the other side of this conundrum - that because of conflicting traditions someone is offended that a Latter Day Saint refuses to toast with the traditional glass of champagne.

But sometimes we do not have clear understanding. As a missionary I was serving on the Oregon coast at a quiet cottage a mile down a dirt road on a slue by the ocean. One night as we approached the turn off to our place the spirit so strongly convinced my companion and I not to go home that night that we drove up a few miles and camped on a beach instead; breaking a mission rule and missing a phone call we should have made to the mission home. The next morning returning to our cottage I called the mission president and explained what happened. He did not criticize our actions and never asked more about it - to this day I do not know why the spirit led us away.

I think perhaps there is a season for all things.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never read in the scriptures that I ought to strive to be a non-conformist. But I have read that I should be submissive, meek, full of love, and easy to be entreated. I've also read that if we are not one, we are not His.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it is. Which is why when people make a stink about taking the sacrament with the right hand I like to say something like, "You're right. We should definitely insist on taking the sacrament with our right hands because 4,000 years ago, people used to wipe their butts with their left hands.*"

I doubt there was ever a culture on earth that commonly [did such things]
I once attended a symposium at a stake center, given by an LDS professor who had worked on various Dead Sea Scrolls projects. He related a few tidbits about the people who preserved the scrolls. The only tidbit that stuck, was that their little community believed that one must not defacate at all on the Sabbath.

I guess it's not specifically the same thing as what you are talking about, but similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone here personally heard someone "make a stink" about taking the Sacrament with the left hand? I've never heard anything of the sort at church, or had anyone I know tell me that they've heard such. I've read claims on the Internet, but it's always kind of "a friend of a friend of a cousin told my Internet gaming buddy. . ."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone here personally heard someone "make a stink" about taking the Sacrament with the left hand? I've never heard anything of the sort at church, or had anyone I know tell me that they've heard such. I've read claims on the Internet, but it's always kind of "a friend of a friend of a cousin told my Internet gaming buddy. . ."

Seems largely to be a convenient strawman for people to be able to demonstrate how unPharasaical and commonsensical they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone here personally heard someone "make a stink" about taking the Sacrament with the left hand? I've never heard anything of the sort at church, or had anyone I know tell me that they've heard such. I've read claims on the Internet, but it's always kind of "a friend of a friend of a cousin told my Internet gaming buddy. . ."

In my youth the sacrament was passed in "Jr. Sunday school". We were instructed as impressionable children (taught and trained) that the sacrament was only to be taken with our right hands. We were also taught not to hold the sacrament tray ourselves when taking the sacrament.

I saw (still as a youth) a film of the Last Supper where Jesus blessed and passed the bread and water. He used both hands and the one receiving the bread and water took it with both hands. It was a small thing but it had a big impact on me at the time. I also had two friends that did not have a right hand. Both have now been through the temple - including marriage - and established their sacred covenants without a right hand.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my youth the sacrament was passed in "Jr. Sunday school". We were instructed as impressionable children (taught and trained) that the sacrament was only to be taken with our right hands. We were also taught not to hold the sacrament tray ourselves when taking the sacrament.

I saw (still as a youth) a film of the Last Supper where Jesus blessed and passed the bread and water. He used both hands and the one receiving the bread and water took it with both hands. It was a small thing but it had a big impact on me at the time. I also had two friends that did not have a right hand. Both have now been through the temple - including marriage - and established their sacred covenants without a right hand.

The Traveler

They didn't teach this in "convert school". And my husband never mentioned it. Is this a Utah thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't teach this in "convert school". And my husband never mentioned it. Is this a Utah thing?

I was not raised in Utah, but I do remember being taught that we should take the sacrament with our "covenant" right hand. But I don't remember it being made a huge deal of, or that we would offend God if we used our left hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was not raised in Utah, but I do remember being taught that we should take the sacrament with our "covenant" right hand. But I don't remember it being made a huge deal of, or that we would offend God if we used our left hand.

Must not be important. I've been in Primary for 3 years and has never heard this taught there either. So, I have 2 kids that have been baptized without knowing anything about it. And I've never encountered it in any missionary discussion or new member discussion or temple prep classes, etc. etc... so, I suspect converts never got taught this.

If the Church want to uphold this tradition, they're not succeeding in my neck of the woods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it sounds to me like it was a tradition/rumor that was casually taught when a lot of us were kids, that is falling out of church folklore. It seems to me that it would have already fallen out of folklore, never to be worried about again, if people on the internet didn't stomp their feet and pout about these tantrums over using the "wrong" hand that apparently never happen outside of rumors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next question: does anyone here have firsthand experience with someone being up in arms about either white shirts or beards? That's another one I've never seen myself or heard of among the people I know in "real"life, but have read 3rd/4th/5th hand accounts on a couple of message boards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't teach this in "convert school". And my husband never mentioned it. Is this a Utah thing?

When I was a youth over 50% of the members of the church lived in Utah and church membership was between 1 and 2 million.

I could have made a long list of "traditions" imbedded in the "Mormon" culture. When I joined the military my concerned grandmother came to me and warned me that I should not disclose my religion while not in the Western US because there were individuals that would try to kill me.

What is interesting is that while serving in the military (Vietnam) era, one night I was dragged from my bed and threthened to be killed unless I denounced my "Mormon" religion. I do not know for sure that they intended to actually carry through on their actions but a friend (Black) showed up with a knife and said he would kill the first person that tried.

That incident had a profound influence on me and started a personal quest of prayer that Blacks be given full "culture and traditional" privilege in the church. I never demanded Blacks be given the Priesthood but for a time I was radical and extreme but now I am the example of mainstream concerning this issue? But concerning women and the Priesthood - I am still the radical extremest but I fully expect to one day be mainstream on this issue as well. I will not try to bring that day about - but I am and will be ready.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next question: does anyone here have firsthand experience with someone being up in arms about either white shirts or beards? That's another one I've never seen myself or heard of among the people I know in "real"life, but have read 3rd/4th/5th hand accounts on a couple of message boards.

Both as a missionary and while in the bishopric - I was told in no uncertain terms to wear a white shirt and tie at church meetings - for a missionary we were to wear white shirts and tie except on our preparation day.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so a white shirt and tie is the uniform for missionaries, and as far as I've seen for bishoprics, too. Does anyone object to that? Why? And as a "normal" (for lack of a better term) member, outside of leadership and missionary situations, has anyone been contentious or insistent about white shirts or beards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so a white shirt and tie is the uniform for missionaries, and as far as I've seen for bishoprics, too. Does anyone object to that? Why? And as a "normal" (for lack of a better term) member, outside of leadership and missionary situations, has anyone been contentious or insistent about white shirts or beards?

I have had several local church leaders who asked that the men and boys wear white shirts if possible. I wouldn't characterize them as contentious though. For the young men it was presented generally as a part of dressing in a respectful non-distracting manner while administering the Sacrament. And for older men as an example to the young men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next question: does anyone here have firsthand experience with someone being up in arms about either white shirts or beards? That's another one I've never seen myself or heard of among the people I know in "real"life, but have read 3rd/4th/5th hand accounts on a couple of message boards.

For the white shirts and ties... My ward enforces it for passing the sacrament (aka non distracting). Since any priesthood holder can and should be able to help pass(assuming worthiness) then they should be ready to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share