Performing the rituals of a religion does not make you a member of that faith

[Anonymous]

There was a “perspective” piece published by Deseret News.

https://www.deseret.com/2022/6/30/23186416/perspective-performing-the-rituals-of-a-religion-does-not-make-you-a-member-of-that-faith-catholic

The basic premise is that (despite your claims) you are only really a member of a faith if you believe all the stuff that this particular faith believes. Also, if you buy into the social progressivism or wokeness then that is your new religion and you cease to be a member of your former faith. The author also call out fascism (specifically in Italy under Mussolini) and communism as other religious supplanters. As someone who leans to the left in my politics, it is not heart warming in the least to be compared with fascists and communists.

Quote:

A “Catholic,” for example, who embraced or even tolerated fascism in Mussolini’s Italy, as far too many Catholics (and even some Jews at the beginning and others) did, is “Catholic” only in a technical and legalistic sense. Catholicism was not actually his or her faith, however much he or she may have insisted that it was.

One gets to choose whether to be a faithful Catholic, for example, or instead an adherent of a secular ideology whose tenets and practices are incompatible with the Catholic understanding of human nature, the human good, human dignity and human destiny.

But you can’t have it both ways. The same is true of the other great traditions of faith.

Quote:

Later, Moses’ faithful lieutenant, Joshua, encounters the same phenomenon — the people drifting from authentic religion into paganism, trying to accommodate and somehow integrate pagan beliefs and practices into the faith Moses had taught them.

Quote:

If leaders are, like Moses and Joshua, willing to fulfill boldly their prophetic duties, the lessons of scripture and of history are that the people will be fortified and respond by recommitting and rededicating themselves.

When Joshua confronted his people with the truth, when he told them that they could not have it both ways, how did they respond? Scripture gives us the rest of the story: “Then the people answered, ‘Far be it from us to forsake the Lord to serve other gods.’”

P.S. What makes the Hebrew religion “authentic” and paganism not?

[Anonymous]

No True Scotsman – The Article

I bet the author of that article would take issue with people saying that Mormons aren’t Christian, yet that’s what their article boils down to, saying Mormons aren’t Christian while using different labels.

Quote:

Social progressivism and other secular ideologies are trying to influence the great historical traditions of faith. But you can’t have it both ways

Is this something that someone said in the year 2022 or something someone said about Jesus 2000 years ago? I’m positive that the zealots of Jesus’ day would consider his doctrines as secular progressivism, fascism, communism, or whatever other pejorative dog whistle people used back in those days.

There are many false dichotomies mixed with black and white thinking in the article. Sure people can have it both ways. They’ve been having it both ways for millennia. Religions evolve. Faith evolves. The key is to try to trade up with each evolution, the Beatitudes come to mind.

I’m more comfortable with mislabeling myself than I am with mislabeling others.

[Anonymous]

There is a whole study of this type of thing – faith identity is one thing, political identity is a different thing. In this case, I think we have seen a lot of people mixing the 2 up (mostly as a validation technique for politics) – and being in an era where a case could be made that religious identity is weaker then political identity for individuals.

For a very long time (more leadership then others as well played a factor), maintaining the “tribe” meant “OR” – conform OR be pushed out of the community (and preserve the purity of the tribe). Moses, for all his outside status of being raised an Egyptian, was an OR kind of guy. But, in the last 100 years, there has been the vocalization of the “AND” culture where there is tension on managing commitments for both identities. There is also attention being given to “intersectionality” – this idea that there are a variety of “community” affiliations intersecting within a person and what that looks like.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

No True Scotsman – The Article

Yes, indeed.

AmyJ wrote:

But, in the last 100 years, there has been the vocalization of the “AND” culture where there is tension on managing commitments for both identities. There is also attention being given to “intersectionality” – this idea that there are a variety of “community” affiliations intersecting within a person and what that looks like.

Yes, I agree. The author seems to be saying that there are some political ideologies that are compatible with “authentic” faith and some that are not. I found myself wondering if being a capitalist was compatible under his definitions. I bet that he does find it compatible. Why? Because it fits with his norms and comfort level. He has become acclimatized to that temperature and environment.

Why does the Deseret News publish this guy’s perspective? Can anybody write perspective articles? Does publishing the article act as a form of tacit endorsement of not really?

[Anonymous]

Who gets to determine the list of requirements for someone to be a “real” adherent of a particular faith? For some religions there is a clear hierarchy with a single leader, like the LDS prophet or Catholic pope. The leader can decide what the official doctrine is. But what about Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, or hundreds of other religions without an ultimate religious authority?

Quote:

At the other end of the spectrum are those most strongly allegiant to the old religion or religions. They will refuse to capitulate to the new and will resist efforts to coerce them by means of cultural or political power

The author says this like it’s the most noble way to go. But as we cover the Old Testament in Sunday School, let’s say I’m really glad at some point there were those who were not loyal to the “old religions”. Otherwise we’d still be stoning people as part of our religious observance. And by the way, the “inauthentic” paganism is likely the oldest of the old religions, maybe the author should consider that. Also, many early church leaders defended or practiced polygamy as a fundamental tenet of the LDS faith, they may think modern members have capitulated to the world’s demands.

Quote:

those who wish to retain the forms and symbols of the great historical traditions of religious faith while recasting those traditions

What is Christianity but the recasting of Jewish traditions? Was it wrong of Jesus and early Christians to apply Jewish tradition and prophecies to their new beliefs? Were they not “real” Jews because of this? They likely thought of themselves as Jewish, but others may have disagreed.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

Why does the Deseret News publish this guy’s perspective? Can anybody write perspective articles? Does publishing the article act as a form of tacit endorsement of not really?

I get the impression that public figures or people with an impressive resume can get their opinions published in most newspapers, while the average Joe might not. The author of this article is apparently a professor at Princeton.

I don’t think this necessarily represents Deseret News’ agreement with the author’s opinions, but it may represent that they think this person’s opinions matter more than the average person’s.

[Anonymous]

Perhaps it is ironic that the author seems to be arguing for a black and white world. Or at least a world where, if you are not completely black or completely white then you do not have the right to consider yourself as such.

[Author]

Posts