Cataloging Activity

[Anonymous]

Since a child I have found that my generation of Latter-day Saints seem to believe in there being only two catagories of Mormon: Active or Inactive (used to be known as Jack Mormons…I have no idea what the Jack means or where it came from. Evangelicals break us into two groups, Mormon and Temple Mormon. Temple Mormons being endowed and a tougher nut to crack.

Without going too far down the rabbit hole, what are the gradations? TBM seems to be one on this forum, I’ve never heard that one before. Would a system like this make sense:

Orthodox. Faithful members, do their HT/VT, all meetings and social events, actively make it to the temple, full tilt folks.

Conservative. Hold to beliefs, most meetings, some social events, hot and miss HT/VT, hold a recommend, may not act on it.

Progressive. Hold to core believes, willing to question and hold opposing views, recommend holding…maybe, some meetings and events.

Secular. Consider themselves Mormon, obey cultural standards (no drinkin’ cheatin’ cussing) but as a whole their attendance or immersion in the church is not a primary concern. No recommend or extracurricular activity.

Agnostic. Not attending or “active” but not hostile. Won’t shoot you off the porch but won’t invite you up either.

Disenfranchised. Hostile, voluntarily cut off. Not interested in contact of any sort.

Making any sense at all? I ask because, being old school I’ve always accepted the “either you is or you ain’t” school of thought and over the years I’ve seen it’s clearly more complex.

[Anonymous]

Actually this post makes perfect sense. Even with the orthodox and conservative Mormons, they don’t agree on everything within the church. When it comes to wanting to go to the temple (although I haven’t renewed my recommend yet) paying my tithing, studying the scriptures, going to church I am orthodox or conservative, but when it comes to how I feel about people leaving or never joining the church I am much more progressive. I feel that Heavenly Father might guide people out of his church or to other religions if they aren’t happy in his church or is more happy in other religions. I’m also much more open to the modern prophets and apostles being inspired, while at the same time being open to them being about they consider church doctrine and don’t consider church doctrine. I also believe this about the prophets and apostles of the past.

[Anonymous]

I’m not one to label or pigeon hole people, but don’t disagree with your classifications. I think if put into practice, however, we might find that most of us don’t totally fit into one category or another – like IloveChrist says, some might be in one category on some things and another category on others. FWIW, I’m probably somewhere between progressive and secular.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I think it’s complicated. For instance, you can still do HT/VT, attend all meetings and activities, hold a calling, etc. and be agnostic when it comes to beliefs – you’d just be doing it for different reasons.

For me it would be a full spectrum of what people do, things that can be observed like attendance, performing the duties of a calling, etc.

and what people believe, where without someone being open you could only guess.

In other words a member might be doing the external things but have their own beliefs/reasons for doing so or a member might not be doing the external things but be a 100% believer if you will.

Edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Mormon” class=”bbcode_url”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Mormon

[Anonymous]

Some people online see me as liberal and borderline apostate (yeah, I know how that sounds here ), lots of people see me as completely orthodox and traditional (since they don’t hear lots of my unorthodox views), I am all over the map in my views – collectively, and I flat-out defy easy classifications and stereotypes. It drives some people nuts, since they want to be able to assume what I will say about a topic based on a classification – and then I go and say something totally different than their assumptions.

Honestly, I think there are WAY more members like that, to some degree, than most people realize – simply because we are, generally, a non-boat-rocking people who tend to keep our differing opinions to ourselves and go along with the general flow of a conversation being led by someone who is a volunteer just like us – perhaps largely because we know we might be teaching the lesson soon and don’t want others to argue with us when we’re teaching.

Having said all of that, I would say I am a moderate, theologically, who is fully active in the Church. I am orthoprax (meaning I live a life that is orthodox in practice) and impossible to categorize with regard to -doxy (meaning I believe all over the map). In other words, like most people, I think, I am my own “I am” – and, more than just about anything else, I wish everyone in the Church valued that simple standard. I think our current First Presidency does so, certainly to a greater extent than any previous FP in my lifetime, but I want it to continue to flow to the end of the local rows. It might take a generation passing before we can enter that particular Promised Land, but I see it beginning to happen now, so I hope it continues.

[Author]

Posts