Religious People Confuse Me...

[Tough Grits]

Okay, not my best title for a thread, but I didn't know how to phrase what is bothering/puzzling me.

So most of you know that I grew up not believing in God or organized religion.

Being an atheist was easy. Don't believe in God = Atheist.

Simple. One rule. One label.

I don't like labels, but since people insist on using labels for themselves and for others, I have a question.

Should anybody label themselves with the religion they "profess" to belong to?

Example: my Cuban grandparents were "Catholic", yet they never went to church, prayed, or did anything remotely religious from my observation during the years I was raised around them.

Example: my American grandparents were "Mormon", yet they never went to church, prayed, or did anything remotely religious from my observation during the years I was raised around them.

Why did they call themselves Catholic or Mormon? They did nothing, from what I can recall, that would earn either of those labels.

For that matter, could I dare label myself a Mormon? Do I live up to every covenant, principle, and doctrine that the label entails?

Wouldn't it be better to just state that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Therefore, stating my membership is not only stating a fact, but it is not claiming to be something that others might question.

Please, no stones or tomatoes thrown at me...and no need to digest or refute every thought or word of my post. I am just puzzled why some feel the need to label themselves, or identify with something that they are not really adhering to.

I am only curious. I have no judgment or agenda. It is just something that I have been thinking about lately.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Tough Grits
Inserted a question mark.

[Dravin]

For that matter, could I dare label myself a Mormon? Do I live up to every covenant, principle, and doctrine that the label entails?

Wouldn't it be better to just state that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Therefore, stating my membership is not only stating a fact, but it is not claiming to be something that others might question.

Well...

Mor·mon noun \ˈmȯr-mən\

Definition of MORMON

1: the ancient redactor and compiler of the Book of Mormon presented as divine revelation by Joseph Smith

2: latter-day saint; especially : a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Link: Mormon - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Seems to me like asking:

Why use a label like Alaskan? Instead say you are a native or resident of Alaska.

[prisonchaplain]

Short answer to OP--many people label themselves according to the religion of their families (especially parents) out of respect. EXAMPLE--a good many inactive LDS would be quick to defend the church if they overheard friends or colleagues belittle it. Why? Out of respect for the parents and their upbringing, in many cases.

Some people may honestly misunderstand. They tell me they don't want to go to church because it's likely full of hypocrites. Yet, most of the "hypocrites" they have met probably don't go to church either. In my cynical moments I want to answer, "Well, you might fit in just fine then." (J/K!)

Seriously, though. A label helps people know what you identify with. Inactives mislead when they say they are a particular religion. They might do better to say, "I'm not practicing any religion right now, but I grew up ..."

Then again, often, when times get troubling the faith of the fathers arises. Most inmates who come to my chapels say they went to church when they were young.

[Tough Grits]

Seems to me like asking:

Why use a label like Alaskan? Instead say you are a native or resident of Alaska.

Because that is different.

Aren't we taught in this Church that there is more to being Mormon that simply being baptized, or even having gone to the temple. It is about a day-in and day-out way of life and way of thought.

I want to know why some people call themselves something that they never practice. I can't ask my grandparents, as they are all dead.

Is it cultural...as in the case of my Hispanic grandparents? Is it a social thing to identify ourselves to what side of the God/No-God line we belong?

[Tough Grits]

Short answer to OP--many people label themselves according to the religion of their families (especially parents) out of respect. EXAMPLE--a good many inactive LDS would be quick to defend the church if they overheard friends or colleagues belittle it. Why? Out of respect for the parents and their upbringing, in many cases.

Some people may honestly misunderstand. They tell me they don't want to go to church because it's likely full of hypocrites. Yet, most of the "hypocrites" they have met probably don't go to church either. In my cynical moments I want to answer, "Well, you might fit in just fine then." (J/K!)

Seriously, though. A label helps people know what you identify with. Inactives mislead when they say they are a particular religion. They might do better to say, "I'm not practicing any religion right now, but I grew up ..."

Then again, often, when times get troubling the faith of the fathers arises. Most inmates who come to my chapels say they went to church when they were young.

Thank you PC. You knew what I was asking, and I appreciate your answer.

Inactives mislead when they say they are a particular religion. They might do better to say, "I'm not practicing any religion right now, but I grew up ..."

Thank you for this statement. I agree. Maybe I wouldn't have been so jaded or anti religion as a child/youth if the adults around me had been more honest and had stated something similar to what you typed.

I was ridiculed for being atheist, but looking back I feel I was more honest about my state of religion (or lack thereof) than the adults in my life who proclaimed to be things that I never saw them practice. It made me feel like it was better to proclaim a religious label and not live up to it, than to be an atheist or to not have any label at all.

Again, thanks for understanding my question. :)

[estradling75]

Sometimes it might help to remove the subtext.... Lets remove religion from the statements and see what you think...

What would you think of someone that claimed to be rich? A genius? Related or otherwise in contact with someone famous?

But no matter how much they talked about it they never showed any proof, never did more then talk?

What would you think of them? And why (if it is) should religious types be treated any different?

[Vort]

The thread title reminds me of this.

SNL - Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer

[Dravin]

Because that is different.

Not really, they're both different ways of saying the same thing.

Aren't we taught in this Church that there is more to being Mormon that simply being baptized, or even having gone to the temple.

Yes, and? That doesn't change that one of the definitions for the word Mormon is a member of the Church. You're loading the word down with connotative meanings and then complaining that not everyone who uses the word shares that. It's true enough but that's basically the nature of language when it comes to connotative meanings. Heck, it even applies to denotative meanings, just to a lesser degree as there tends to be fewer of them.

I want to know why some people call themselves something that they never practice. I can't ask my grandparents, as they are all dead.

Clearly they are using different definitions of the word than you are, either connotative or denotative. As PC points out for some it's a familial identifier, and I would add, a cultural identifier, a membership identifier, or a practice identifier. And all of those can be modified by degrees or combination.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Dravin

[Tough Grits]

Not really, their both different ways of saying the same thing.

Yes, and? That doesn't change that one of the definitions for the word Mormon is a member of the Church. You're loading the word down with connotative meanings and then complaining that not everyone who uses the word shares that. It's true enough but that's basically the nature of language when it comes to connotative meanings. Heck, it even applies to denotative meanings, just to a lesser degree as there tends to be fewer of them.

Clearly they are using different definitions of the word than you are, either connotative or denotative. As PC points out for some it's a familial identifier, and I would add, a cultural identifier, a membership identifier, or a practice identifier. And all of those can be modified by degrees or combination.

You and I do not use the same wave-lengths. I am not sure we are even in the same universe. But thanks for your comment. :)

[Tough Grits]

Sometimes it might help to remove the subtext.... Lets remove religion from the statements and see what you think...

What would you think of someone that claimed to be rich? A genius? Related or otherwise in contact with someone famous?

But no matter how much they talked about it they never showed any proof, never did more then talk?

What would you think of them? And why (if it is) should religious types be treated any different?

I might think that they really were what they claimed, I might think that they misunderstand the label they were giving themselves, I might think that they are trying to convince others and/or themselves of something that may or may not be true, and/or I might think that they are trying to impress others.

I just don't know why my grandparents called themselves something that they were not. I guess, like PC eluded to, it made them feel better to have something to associate with, despite the fact that they were not actually practicing the label they claimed.

Not sure if I answered your questions the way you intended in order to get your point. Nothing personal, Grumpy Bear, but I don't always "get" certain posters on this forum. I think some of us are so different in our thought processes and in our manner of expression, that we don't always "connect".

[Tough Grits]

The thread title reminds me of this.

SNL - Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer

Brother, you aren't far from the truth! Some people truly frighten and confuse this little cavegirl!! LOL

I went from not believing in anything, to believing in what I believe to be the fullness of the Gospel upon the earth.

Thank goodness I am still learning. Thank goodness I still feel the need to ask questions. Thank goodness I have not reached a point that I am beyond trying to understand things.

[Tough Grits]

You're loading the word down with connotative meanings and then complaining that not everyone who uses the word shares that.

Complaining? I asked a question.

Loading down a word with connotative meaning? I love the word hyperbole.

I wish you would learn to respond to me without having to throw in some kind of jab or verbal assault, which of course, is merely my opinion.

If you don't like me, if you don't like my posts, if you don't like my questions, then why do you bother to read anything I write?

It is seriously getting old. If you have something to say, then say it without all the other negative stuff or the assumptions on my thoughts, motives, or feelings.

[Dravin]

Complaining? I asked a question.

Yes, you're complaining that people don't ascribe the same meanings to words as you do. That they're misusing labels.

Loading down a word with connotative meaning? I love the word hyperbole.

In response to having a denotative meaning of the word Mormon being pointed out as having the same meaning as your proposed alternative your response was that it didn't also carry sufficient connotative meaning.

I wish you would learn to respond to me without having to throw in some kind of jab or verbal assault, which of course, is merely my opinion.

If you think saying someone is complaining or loading a word with connotative meaning is a jab or verbal assault we have very different ideas about what those things are.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Dravin

[Tough Grits]

Yes, you're complaining that people don't ascribe the same meanings to words as you do. That they're misusing labels.

In response to having a denotative meaning of the word Mormon being pointed out as having the same denotative meaning as your proposed alternative your response was that it didn't carry sufficient connotative meanings.

If you think saying someone is complaining or loading a word with connotative meaning is a jab or verbal assault we have very different ideas about what those things are.

I think that you are intelligent. I think that you know how to use words. I think that you know exactly what I am saying to you. I think that you are choosing to continue your manner of interaction with me, despite the fact that it hasn't worked thus far.

You did not type that you "thought" I was complaining. I cannot argue what you think. No, you STATED that I was complaining. That, I can absolutely argue. I was not complaining. I made an observationa and then followed it with a question.

Using your logic, anybody and everybody who posts on this forum with an observation and question is complaining. Therefore, we should just close the forum and be done with it, so that all the "whiners" and "complainers" can have nothing to post about.

I wonder why you even bother to participate in forums full of whiners and complainers who have the audacity to make observations, have opinions, and pose questions.

[prisonchaplain]

I was ridiculed for being atheist, but looking back I feel I was more honest about my state of religion (or lack thereof) than the adults in my life who proclaimed to be things that I never saw them practice. It made me feel like it was better to proclaim a religious label and not live up to it, than to be an atheist or to not have any label at all.

I once taught a Bible study in Miami. One of the students was an Argentinian atheist. She said that 99% of her friends were Catholic in Name Only. Yet, they condemned her for being an atheist. She perceived herself to be the only honest one. To my way of thinking she was right. It made her ripe for a true conversion. Perhaps you are the confirmation! :)

[Dravin]

I cannot argue what you think.

You most certainly can, by using actions and statements as evidence for a conclusion. If it makes you feel better I will amend my statement, "You come across as complaining..."

I think that you are choosing to continue your manner of interaction with me, despite the fact that it hasn't worked thus far.

I must say I haven't notice any particular adjustment in how you interact with me. In fact this exchange is rather familiar compared to others. I disagree with you, you feel I'm attacking you, and then you go on to assign some sort of vendetta against you in a dramatic fashion. With post #9 I figured that pattern was to be avoided by you simply not being interested in discussing the issue at hand, but that thought was premature it appears.

Using your logic, anybody and everybody who posts on this forum with an observation and question is complaining.

What logic is that? Please quote the logic, along with any stated premises, I laid out. You'll be hard pressed as I never stated such. I grant you, if my argument was, "You posted an observation and a question therefore you were complaining" then you would be correct*. The only problem is I never made such an argument.

*Almost, anyone posting a question or an observation would fall outside of the premise.

I wonder why you even bother to participate in forums full of whiners and complainers who have the audacity to make observations, have opinions, and pose questions.

I like to exchange ideas with others, and quite often insightful or witty things are posted to the board.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Dravin

[Tough Grits]

I disagree with you, you feel I'm attacking you, and then you go on to assign some sort of vendetta against you in a dramatic fashion.

As I recall, I am the one who, "refuses to engage in back and forth".

Ah, but you have reminded me of why I have refused to engage in back and forth with precious spirits such as yours.

Thank you for that reminder, dear brother. I will not soon forget that I have no need to go back and forth with anybody. Those who wish to interact with me in a pleasant, harmonious manner have no trouble doing so. Those who do not, well, they have their place and their purpose too.

The cheek is turned. The slate is clean. All is well. Thanks for your reminder, I truly appreciate it. Much love...Sister TG. :)

[Tough Grits]

I once taught a Bible study in Miami. One of the students was an Argentinian atheist. She said that 99% of her friends were Catholic in Name Only. Yet, they condemned her for being an atheist. She perceived herself to be the only honest one. To my way of thinking she was right. It made her ripe for a true conversion. Perhaps you are the confirmation! :)

Ah, Miami. How I miss the food!

Yes, Miami is a different culture. My Cuban side of the family, and many of the Cubans that I knew, were Catholic, but they did not participate. I often felt that it was simply another aspect of being Hispanic (Cuban specifically) to proclaim Catholicism as their religion, though they did not actually worship or participate.

Still, they were good people. I loved both sets of my grandparents. I learned much from both sets, but I did not learn about religion from either one.

Looking back, that may have been a good thing. I guess everything happened the way it was supposed to, for me to find and accept the gospel.

[classylady]

My Aunt was an active LDS member as a child and teenager. She married a man who was not a member. After her marriage she only occasionally attended church. Her six children, my cousins, were all baptized, but didn't have any real upbringing in the church and really know very little about it. They still call themselves "Mormons", but don't follow the Word of Wisdom, etc. If there's a death in their family, it's a "Mormon" funeral that they will have. And they find a lot of comfort from their active LDS extended family when tragedy strikes. Other than that, they have very little to do with the church. If they want to call themselves "Mormon", I see nothing wrong with it. It is their heritage. The Church is where they turn to for funerals, and sometimes even marriages. My cousins have a vague knowledge of temple work for the dead, and have agreed to have my Aunt and my Uncle sealed.

[Tough Grits]

My Aunt was an active LDS member as a child and teenager. She married a man who was not a member. After her marriage she only occasionally attended church. Her six children, my cousins, were all baptized, but didn't have any real upbringing in the church and really know very little about it. They still call themselves "Mormons", but don't follow the Word of Wisdom, etc. If there's a death in their family, it's a "Mormon" funeral that they will have. And they find a lot of comfort from their active LDS extended family when tragedy strikes. Other than that, they have very little to do with the church. If they want to call themselves "Mormon", I see nothing wrong with it. It is their heritage. The Church is where they turn to for funerals, and sometimes even marriages. My cousins have a vague knowledge of temple work for the dead, and have agreed to have my Aunt and my Uncle sealed.

Thank you. I found the same thing true with my Cuban family. Maybe people just need something to be connected to, regardless of whether they "live and breathe" it.

[Guest]

As I recall, I am the one who, "refuses to engage in back and forth".

Ah, but you have reminded me of why I have refused to engage in back and forth with precious spirits such as yours.

Thank you for that reminder, dear brother. I will not soon forget that I have no need to go back and forth with anybody. Those who wish to interact with me in a pleasant, harmonious manner have no trouble doing so. Those who do not, well, they have their place and their purpose too.

The cheek is turned. The slate is clean. All is well. Thanks for your reminder, I truly appreciate it. Much love...Sister TG. :)

Bless your heart.

[beefche]

As I recall, I am the one who, "refuses to engage in back and forth".

Ah, but you have reminded me of why I have refused to engage in back and forth with precious spirits such as yours.

Thank you for that reminder, dear brother. I will not soon forget that I have no need to go back and forth with anybody. Those who wish to interact with me in a pleasant, harmonious manner have no trouble doing so. Those who do not, well, they have their place and their purpose too.

The cheek is turned. The slate is clean. All is well. Thanks for your reminder, I truly appreciate it. Much love...Sister TG. :)

TG, help me with my Southern talk. Using "precious" means what exactly? Isn't it the same as "bless his heart"?

[Tough Grits]

TG, help me with my Southern talk. Using "precious" means what exactly? Isn't it the same as "bless his heart"?

Not that I know of.

I used the word "precious" in that sentence to mean "of great worth".

I don't have to like a person, or like how they treat me, to acknowlege that their spirit is precious. We are all God's children.

You don't know me personally. I wish you did. I am not fake. I changed gears because I knew it was the right thing to do. My post was sincere and forthright.

I do not like the way Dravin "speaks" to me, but that should NEVER prevent me from knowing that he is a precious spirit of God, and that arguing with him is not worth losing the Spirit. Period.

Maybe I should ask Eowyn what she meant when she stated "Bless your heart" to me. I am not sure how she meant it or what it means...but if she is passing on cheerful thoughts and good blessings to me, then I will take it at face value! :)

But at least you asked me. I appreciate that. ~TG

[SteveVH]

Getting back to the topic, it seems we have some Catholics who think that one is born a Catholic. It's a cultural thing for them but they are no more Catholic than I am Muslim. So it really matters little what one calls themself. I know many "Mormons" who claim the label but haven't been active for many, many years. It's true in every faith tradition.

My priest once told me that sometimes he felt his job was to "hatch 'em, match 'em and dispatch 'em". They come to Church to get baptized, to get married and when they die. It's really sad. On the other hand I see many faithful Catholics and Mormons as well, so not all is lost. :) I am proud to call myself a Catholic and I would hope that you are proud to call yourself a Latter Day Saint. It's sad that our faiths are many times judged on the basis of those who fail, rather than by those who are faithful.

It can also go the other direction. I have heard people say that they don't feel worthy to come to Church. I tell them then that is exactly where you need to be. We don't go to Church because we are worthy, we go to Church because we are sinners in need of God's mercy.

[Tough Grits]

Getting back to the topic, it seems we have some Catholics who think that one is born a Catholic. It's a cultural thing for them but they are no more Catholic than I am Muslim. So it really matters little what one calls themself. I know many "Mormons" who claim the label but haven't been active for many, many years. It's true in every faith tradition.

My priest once told me that sometimes he felt his job was to "hatch 'em, match 'em and dispatch 'em". They come to Church to get baptized, to get married and when they die. It's really sad. On the other hand I see many faithful Catholics and Mormons as well, so not all is lost. :) I am proud to call myself a Catholic and I would hope that you are proud to call yourself a Latter Day Saint. It's sad that our faiths are many times judged on the basis of those who fail, rather than by those who are faithful.

It can also go the other direction. I have heard people say that they don't feel worthy to come to Church. I tell them then that is exactly where you need to be. We don't go to Church because we are worthy, we go to Church because we are sinners in need of God's mercy.

Hello Stephen! I was hoping that I would hear from you on this thread! Since you are Catholic, I was hoping to hear your view on how many of the members of my family and the community in which I grew up view religion (as part of culture, rather than worship).

Thank you for your input!

There was a quote today by an apostle, Dallin H. Oaks:

"Following Christ is not a casual or occasional practice, but a continuous commitment and way of life that applies at all times and in all places."

I like that quote, because I feel it applies to all of us--those who are active, as well as those who have fallen away (even if of another religion). Just because I attend church on Sundays, does not mean that I am any more continuously committed than the one who attends occasionally or never. For me, this quote is reminding ME that I still have much to do beyond attending church every Sunday. It reminds ME that I have much to do beyond reading my scriptures daily. It reminds ME that I have much to do beyond merely proclaiming membership...I need to LIVE that membership.

In fact, another leader in the Church, Enrique R. Falabella, had this to say:

"It is not enough to know the scriptures, we have to live them."

Oh, and your mention of hearing some say that they don't feel worthy of attending church, reminded me of the following quote from President Dieter F. Uchtdorf:

"Isn't it wonderful to know that we don't have to be perfect to experience the blessings and gifts of our Heavenly Father?"

None of us are perfectly worthy, but in order to become more worthy we must start taking steps in the direction of our goal.

I know that I get over-excited. I know that sometimes I miss the forest for the trees, but I just LOVE the gospel. I truly can't imagine my life without it...and yet I can, because I lived 24 years of my life without the gospel. I don't want to go back to that...ever.

Sometimes I wish I was more knowledgeable about religion, and about the gospel. I wish I had been raised in church. But then I remember to be grateful for what I have, not what I could have or should have had. My experiences without any gospel or religion in my life are probably what give me so much excitement for it now.

Anyway, I hope I didn't get too far off topic Stephen, or that I seemed frenetic in this post. Our church just had General Conference for two days, in which members of the Church were able to listen to the leaders of our Church. I am excited by the things I heard. I am uplifted by their boldness and their faith. I am strengthened by their deep testimonies and abiding love for the Savior.

Again, thank you for your response. I truly appreciate your words and your understanding of my question. I appreciate being able to hear a Catholic's stance on what I witnessed in my own family's view of Catholicism.

Thank you!

Edited April 8, 2013 by Tough Grits
Incorrect apostle with a quote..sorry! ;o)