- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
My brother was a cook for years. He has told me countless times that the majority of the alcohol in the wine is cooked out. You can’t get drunk off a dish that was cooked with wine. There are plenty of health benefits in tea. I drink white and green tea very regularly. I will on occasion drink Irish/English Breakfast tea.
I do drink coffee from time to time but not very often. My only concern with coffee is that a person could easily become addicted to it if becomes a party of their daily routine. I’ve known plenty of people who need their coffee every morning or else they are rather grumpy.
I’ve noticed that most tea drinkers don’t absolutely need it. If they skip a day they will not have any major withdrawal issues.
As mentioned by others Herbal tea shouldn’t even be a discussion there is nothing wrong with that. I will drink teas containing chamomile to help me relax at the end of the day. I enjoy drinking teas made by Celestial Seasonings. since it contains the name Celestial it makes everything okay right?
Quote:There are plenty of health benefits in tea.
Plenty of health ?deficits too. All I can say is my health has improved since I gave black tea up. I agree with the church on this, but it’s out of experience. On the other hand, I do not consider it a “sin” to drink tea.
In retrospect I often wonder if it was tea that killed my mother in a round about way, but I can’t go into details.
A good quote from a long time ago. I don’t feel the Church as a whole has progressed much in the right attitude being taught in this speech back in 1932… Quote:Men often construe the Word of Wisdom as a commandment against it and invest the practice of it with the stigma of sin. I think my own preaching against it may be so construed. Am I right? Are all of us right? Have not some of our people failed to distinguish between the offense and the offender?
I do not mean to say that i doubt the wisdom of the Word of Wisdom. I know that it contains God’s wishes and direction for the welfare of His children, and I am sure that those who fail to heed the teaching of it will lose blessings of great worth, but I am not sure that we have not estranged many from the Church or at least contributed to their estrangement by attributing to violation of our standards of health, harmful as it may be, a moral turpitude and sinful magnitude out of proportion of the real seriousness of the offense. Maybe I am wrong. I do not claim that my analysis is correct, but I think it worthy of your attention.
I am sure that many young people feel themselves ostracized from the Church by reason of the emphasis and the somewhat intolerant attitude some of us have shown toward the user, not the use, of tobacco. I believe there are some good people in the Church to whom the use of tobacco is so repugnant and who are so offended by those who use it that they may actually develop a feeling akin to hatred toward the smoker. This state of mind, to my thinking is regrettable and dangerous–dangerous to the unfortunate who succumbs to a bad practice in that he instinctively sets up a resistance to the man who dislikes him, and dangerous to the church because such people characterize it with a reputation for dogmatic intolerance that weakens its influence with its members and in the world.
[snip]
First, I hold that it is entirely compatible with the genius of the Church to change its procedure and interpretations as changes in thought, education and environment of people from time to time seem to warrant, provided, of course, that no violence is done to the elemental concepts of truth which lie at the basis of our work. I would not discard a practice merely because it is old. Indeed, I believe that one of the tests of worth is the test of time. But on the other hand, I would not hang on to a practice or conception after it has outlived its usefulness in a new and ever-changing and better-informed world.
Old conceptions and traditional interpretations must be influenced by newly discovered evidence. Not that ultimate fact and law change, but our understanding varies with our education and experience.“ Elder Stephen L Richards (member of the 1st Presidency) at the 102nd Annual General Conference, April 9, 1932, emphasis added
I believe his warning is still valid to church members who are so exact in their observance of the Word of Wisdom, they ostracize offenders because the emphasis of the sin is held up to such a disproportionate standard to the act.Having said that, I think he is correct with the pragmatism of the church. If there was no further value for the Word of Wisdom, and there was new evidence against it, the Q15 would all come to the conclusion something could be changed.
However, I think they still see utility in it. And therefore, have no desire to revisit it or change it.
I wish, though, they would emphasize more of what Pres Uchtdorf warned and “Stop it” and not judge others.
I have an acquaintance, a man well into his 70s, that lost his faith as a missionary. He drinks one cup of coffee per day on average and says he considers it a convenient sin. It shows to people who know him that he’s not a believer though still attending for cultural reasons. What violating the WoW can do is allow you to make a public statement that you don’t believe and that you don’t care what believers think. By the way there’s a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine today that after surveying over 400,000 people, men that drink coffee, regular or decaf, live 10% and women 13% longer than their abstinent counterparts.
GBSmith wrote:I have an acquaintance, a man well into his 70s, that lost his faith as a missionary. He drinks one cup of coffee per day on average and says he considers it a convenient sin. It shows to people who know him that he’s not a believer though still attending for cultural reasons. What violating the WoW can do is allow you to make a public statement that you don’t believe and that you don’t care what believers think.
By the way there’s a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine today that after surveying over 400,000 people, men that drink coffee, regular or decaf, live 10% and women 13% longer than their abstinent counterparts.I read it—- very interesting article.
Heber13 wrote:A good quote from a long time ago. I don’t feel the Church as a whole has progressed much in the right attitude being taught in this speech back in 1932…
Quote:Men often construe the Word of Wisdom as a commandment against it and invest the practice of it with the stigma of sin…Are all of us right?…
I am not sure that we have not estranged many from the Churchor at least contributed to their estrangement by attributing to violation of our standards of health, harmful as it may be, a moral turpitude and sinful magnitude out of proportion of the real seriousness of the offense…I am sure that many young people feel themselves ostracized from the Church by reason of the emphasis and the somewhat intolerant attitude some of us have shown toward the user, not the use, of tobacco. I believe there are some good people in the Church to whom the use of tobacco is so repugnant and who are so offended by those who use it that they may actually develop a feeling akin to hatred toward the smoker. This state of mind, to my thinking is regrettable and dangerous…to the church because such people characterize it with a reputation for dogmatic intolerance that weakens its influence with its members and in the world…I would not discard a practice merely because it is old…But on the other hand, I would not hang on to a practice or conception after it has outlived its usefulness in a new and ever-changing and better-informed world. Elder Stephen L Richards (member of the 1st Presidency) at the 102nd Annual General Conference, April 9, 1932, emphasis added
Interesting; it would be nice to hear something like this from Church leaders now. I don’t remember ever hearing anything so directly open-minded and thoughtful in any conference talks. Instead it seems like we typically hear about how the world is supposedly evil and constantly getting worse so we need to be extra careful because we know that Satan himself is out to get us through seemingly insignificant sins that are a slippery slope that lead unsuspecting Church members away from the one true path.
It is basically a self-fulfilling prophecy and feedback loop (vicious cycle) where the Church has created an environment that is so unfriendly to anyone that drinks or smokes that most of them will avoid dealing with the Church as much as possible. Then if Church leaders equate Church activity with potential salvation they will understandably conclude that drinking or smoking were a major factor that led to these wayward members’ eternal downfall if they don’t repent and they will often react to these results (lost members) in a way that encourages intolerant and judgmental attitudes about the WoW.
Meanwhile, many active members will never completely repent of other “sins” according to the Church’s official standards such as not consistently paying a full tithe or not strictly obeying the law of chastity without giving up on the Church and becoming permanently inactive at nearly the same rate that drinkers or smokers seem to do. Why is that? My theory is that because drinking and smoking are more externally visible than many other “sins” these members will typically get over worrying that much about what active Church members think about them fairly early in life and they also usually won’t marry a strict practicing Mormon specifically because of these habits. Once that happens their chances of ever returning to full activity for long are not very high even if they do stop drinking or smoking.
This is one I’ve wrestled with. D&C 89 proscribes wine and “strong drinks” but allows that mild barley drinks are good for man. How, then, did beer get banned along with wine and distilled spirits? Kumahito wrote:This is one I’ve wrestled with. D&C 89 proscribes wine and “strong drinks” but allows that mild barley drinks are good for man. How, then, did beer get banned along with wine and distilled spirits?
My opinion…Timing. At the time they were institutionalizing the commandment, beer was a social issue and most Protestant and other religions taught the same thing.
Had it been in the year 2010… Perhaps Red Bull would be considered “strong drink”, and they would have run with that.
I personally don’t believe there is a lot of deep meaning or philosophy behind the arbitrary interpretation of the current form of the Word of Wisdom…it just is what it is.
:think: , and they are just sticking to antique standards.Kumahito wrote:This is one I’ve wrestled with. D&C 89 proscribes wine and “strong drinks” but allows that mild barley drinks are good for man. How, then, did beer get banned along with wine and distilled spirits?
Welcome Kumahito. Strong drinks – i don’t know, probably liquor, right? I know “hot drinks” all of a sudden came to mean coffee and tea when Brother Brigham said people shouldn’t be importing them to keep Mormon moneys in the Mormon economy. That was hugely important to the early church in Utah.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t beer just get thrown in when Heber J. Grant made the WoW a commandment during prohibition?
scooter wrote:Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t beer just get thrown in when Heber J. Grant made the WoW a commandment during prohibition?
This is a topic that has long fascinated me — the development over time of interpreting the WoW. You are correct, all alcoholic beverages got lumped together when the shift of interpretation was pushed during the 1920’s and 1930’s Prohibition era under President Heber J. Grant.
Before that, there was a wide diversity of practice and interpretation. There was a First Presidency letter once stating that “Danish Beer” was not a violation of the WoW. I have yet to figure out exactly what type of product that referenced. I have a copy of a Young Men’s manual from the early 1900’s. The printing used to be sponsored by local businesses with advertisements. There’s an advertisement on the back of the manual for a store that sells wine, beer and whiskey.
The WoW as we interpret it today, is a very recent development, less than 80 years old. Before that, it really wasn’t a huge deal. Some people were strict about it. Others didn’t make a big deal. I also have an old photo of a sealing room in the SLC Temple. It shows spittoons around the room for people who were chewing tobacco.
Here’s the most important change, towards the negative in my opinion, WoW compliance DID NOT bring into question your identity as a Mormon back in the older days, not like it does now. I think it became the de facto replacement for polygamy as the symbol of our being a “peculiar people” (a cohesive tribe). The final abandonment of the practice of polygamy ended right at the same time the WoW shifted to such a high prominence in our culture.
If you risked your life in a leaky boat across the Atlantic ocean, and then walked 2,000 miles across the plains and survived — YOU WERE MORMON!!!!! Nobody would dare think of taking that away from you over some recommendations (words) of wisdom on health.
My one line of ancestors that hearken back to pioneer days converted in Sweden and migrated to Zion. There used to be a saying about the Scandinavian saints. They’ll cross the ocean. They’ll walk the plains. They even put up with the shock of finding out about polygamy when they get to Utah, but don’t you dare take away their beer! They’ll turn right around and walk back to where they came from…
😆 I am new here, and this discussion has particularly struck me, as it is something that I have been pondering on my own quite a bit lately. Because of my own health concerns, I have had to reevaluate my thoughts on the WofW and how it pertains to me on a physical and a spiritual level (along with many other of the church’s teachings, of course). Ultimately, I now believe that the WofW was truly an inspired idea that came from God in the interest of generating better health in church members. IMO, whatever form of revelation JS received was immediately “filtered,” so to speak, through JS’s own assumptions, opinions and interpretations, then filtered again when it was dictated and recorded, and ultimately filtered by the church at large until we arrive at the interpretation we are taught today.
Another point to consider is that while the original revelation on healthy diets may have been revolutionary at the time, it is now out of date, and because of all the
manychanges in every aspect of our diet that have occurred since that time, it no longer makes any sense to try to obey every aspect of the WofW in a literal sense. The great “Tea” debate is a perfect example of that fact. In spite of that opinion, I am technically still following the WofW in the literal interpretations. The reason for this are specific to myself, and I never intend to hold anyone else to my own dietary standard via a moral obligation. Frankly, I am a person who is easily majorly addicted to even mildly addictive substances. This alone has caused me to follow the WofW to an even greater extent than is required of general saints. Alcohol is addictive, and it is bad for me, so I do not drink it. Tobacco is addictive, and it is bad for me, so I do not partake of it. Sugar is addictive, and it is bad for me, so I do not ingest it. Caffeine is addictive, and it is bad for me, so I do not have it.
Do I think that any of these are a moral sin? No, I do not. Do I think mankind would largely benefit from adopting a similar attitude toward all harmful or addictive substances? Certainly, but failing to do so is no worse than any number of weaknesses that I do allow myself. I believe that alcohol is harmful and dangerous, but I also believe that excessive speeding on the freeway is harmful and dangerous, and that rarely stops me from doing it.
So, in all, I have a deep love for what I believe is the true intention of the WofW (to take care of our bodies) and intend to hold that standard for myself for the rest of my life, but I hope to become a person who refuses to judge anyone else simply because they subscribe to a different brand of “sin” than I do.
With the official press release of “Caffeine not Evil” by the church I too have had this on my mind. I love diet Coke and even though I was raised to think it was evil, I decided in my 20’s that it wasn’t, as far as I could research at that time. But yes, many Mormons have thought it was. I even know someone who left their husband mostly over the fact that he wouldn’t give it up. Crazy but true. Sometimes rules taken wrong hurt people. When I was like 7 my friend gave me coke and I drank it not knowing what it was. When I found out, the guilt and shame haunted me for years. Guilt and shame are bad for people’s spiritual development. I think the WoW should include those things. As of late, my goal as been to take apart everything I ever learned and piece by piece build my own tower to God. After coming into a faith crisis for one thing, I found another and another and another that are just not true. I wondered how far it went. So I am just re-learning everything from a more objective standpoint.
The method I have decided to follow is:
1-Study it out. This includes the historical context, who said it and why. Assume that even prophets have their own prejudices, opinions and cultural brain-washings. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, but consider all details.
2-Compare it to my experience and what I know/believe to be true.
3-See what I feel
So I did some looking into the WoW and the medical history changed my perspective completely. The problem is that everyone is trying to apply the medical knowledge of today against a backwards time when the world was a different place to justify the wisdom behind the WoW. So here is my take… (BTW I am not a church history expert at all by any means so if anyone sees any facts I got wrong, please correct me.)
1-The hot drinks of the day and culture of Joseph Smith would have referred to black coffee and black tea. They had other teas but just saying hot drinks really referred to the two. Consider the cultural context.
2-The current medical thinking of the day was that hot drinks and alcohol raised the temperature of the blood. In a balanced body, this would cause illness. In a body that was fatigued or afflicted with certain diseases, hot drinks were often used medicinally to “correct” the imbalance that was causing the illness. So it was medicine. So much like you wouldn’t use morphine if you were healthy because that would be bad, it would be perfectly find to use it if you had an injury where it became necessary. Many people used this as their health regime. It was thought that if you were healthy and you used hot drinks or also alcohol, the rise in temperature of the blood would not only make you susceptible to illness, but also “excited a man’s passions” so that it was much more difficult to control themselves, and their libidos in particular.
3-Also considering the medical context, hot drinks used as medicine were often laced with really bad poisons… thinking they were also medicine. Such as mercury. Mercur,y as probably most of you know, is a heavy metal that is VERY BAD for you. Your body can’t really clean out heavy metals. They just build and build. In the case of mercury, it actually causes insanity after enough exposure. Bad stuff.
4-Joseph Smith’s brother Alvin developed what most now think was appendicitis. Very fatal in those days. He was prescribed coffee laced with Mercury. He shortly after died. Of course it was the appendicitis, not the coffee, but you can see why this caused Joseph to start thinking that perhaps he should ask God what He thought of all these things.
5-People were trying to poison the Mormons with bad sacramental wines.
6-Emma Smith complained that she hated cleaning up the nasty chewed tobacco from the floor of the red brick store.
So… when Joseph went to God, his mental state MAY have already had a bias to what the answer might be. BUT even if he didn’t, God knew that alcohol in excess is bad. That coffees and teas were laced with stuff that was bad. And that tobacco inside the body was bad. So I can totally see why he would answer Joseph in the affirmative that yes, it is a good thing to give up all of that crap. But probably not for the reasons Joseph thought, nor any of the latter pioneers, nor us now. And keep in mind at this time, the WoW was very specifically given by Joseph as a
suggestion, not a commandment. He was very clear about that. THEN… I believe that there developing economic factors. After the saints moved west, it was ideal to cut off as much trade as possible with the outside world. Not only had the world “proved” itself to be dangerous to the saints, but there was much wisdom in reserving all resources to becoming a self sufficient, independent society. The saints couldn’t grow their own coffee and black tea very well. You can’t very well have caffeine addicts running to the dangerous outside world and doing trade, losing precious resources to the outside world now can you? And I do happen to agree that copious amounts of alcohol is dangerous to the spirit, and in a time when people needed to walk the fine line to survive, it’s better to abstain than to risk. So then it became a commandment.
The question now becomes, is the WoW as we understand it outdated? Maybe. But the problem is that Mormons are a very die-hard traditional people and they don’t take to change very well. If it were to change, it would cause many people to fall away, because God is supposed to be the same yesterday, today and forever right? While He may be, us as people are not, and sometimes rules need to change to fit the people. But it is difficult for people to see it that way. So my guess is that it will NOT change, anytime soon, unless and until the potential people who will be kept away because of the WoW outweighs the number of people who will fall away because of the change. Also, it will not change unless one of the prophets goes to God and specifically asks. And why would they do that? It has worked so well for so long. And for both this point, and the former, consider how the blacks in the priesthood change was brought about and it’s effects. People still struggle with this. ‘Nuff said about that.
So can we as individuals them override what the whole of the church teaches, knowing these things? I believe that God is not as black and white as most people believe. I think He does allow for the individual and their specific growth patterns. I believe in now what I call the spirit of the perfect law. I think as we all try to attain perfection in all things it is OK to not always do everything perfectly all the time. It’s IMPOSSIBLE. Even for prophets. As with most commandments and moral suggestions in the church, there is some wisdom and there is also a spirit of the perfect law that we should eventually shoot for, but you won’t be sent to hell because you can’t or won’t do it all perfectly well right now at this second. The spirit of the perfect law of the WoW to me would basically be this: If you really, really got the concept that you are a true divine being, and your body was such a great gift to you, a divine gift from God, and every minute you spend on this earth is a divine gift you can use to do good and for growth and you need to be as healthy as you can to do that, you would NEVER DO ANYTHING EVER to defile it or hurt it in any way. Not only would this mean you don’t put unhealthy chemicals into it like caffeine or alcohol, but you wouldn’t eat that much meat, you wouldn’t eat carbs held together by fat and deep fried in fat and covered in carbs and fat. You wouldn’t eat twinkies. You would eat right. You would exercise. You would get enough sleep. You would wear your seat belt. If you were a perfect being, this is how you would treat your body.
But you are NOT a perfect being and guess what?? It’s OK! You are not supposed to be. Not right now. This is something that if you feel you can work on it right now, then do it! Yay for you! It will only bring you good natural consequences (blessings.) If you feel that you would rather work on something else right now, and you can only handle so much, then do it. Yay for you! I think as long as we are on a continual path upward, that is exactly where God wants us to be, and that is enough. (To quote Dori in Nemo… “just keep swimming, just keep swimming…”) As any of you know who have read my beef with the 3 kingdoms cutoffs, I do not believe in the time-limit-crap. Upward and onward is all that counts. Set your projection in this life and it will continue. Detours and slow times are expected. I think it takes some of us longer than others to make it, but I think none of us will be held away from God in the end because we didn’t get it soon enough. Time is a mortal illusion. It is not God’s limitation. So that is my soapbox there.
Moving on, abstaining from coffee and tea is a small sacrifice for many members, especially if they never got addicted in the first place. It may be a small thing but it makes them feel like they can do something right. I don’t see the harm in letting them keep it. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the item, but it’s a show of obedience. I am sure God likes that a lot- good brownie points. I don’t think the church will see the point in changing this. But it would be nice if they didn’t use it to judge people as unworthy and less. I don’t think God sees it that way. just try not to look around and worry about what anyone else thinks. Just between you and God. Lehi’s vision comes to my mind here, only in some cases the people laughing in the buildings are members of the church….
Meoclew wrote:Another point to consider is that while the original revelation on healthy diets may have been revolutionary at the time, it is now out of date, and because of all the
manychanges in every aspect of our diet that have occurred since that time, it no longer makes any sense to try to obey every aspect of the WofW in a literal sense.
good point. I find it interesting that some things in church are accepted and people are comfortable accepting Gods word is out of date and so we should “liken it” to our circumstances (like God telling Noah or Nephi to build a ship doesn’t apply literally to us), but then some things are proof-texted, andIterally taught. The book of Daniel talks about WoW, as if it as the same thing we have today, or Nephites got Lamanites drunk, and sacrament wine was just grape juice….and stuff like that as if the Word of Wisdom as we have It now is an eternal principle. It seems unlikely to me. Since that makes sense to me, it opens that door on so many other topics.
I like RagDoll’s “just keep swimming” cafeteria approach. Do what you can and keep progressing.
It’s also interesting how many people who object to the changes in how the WofW is interpreted and “enforced” currently do so largely because they don’t like the move from counsel to command or the use of the prohibitions as temple attendance markers – but argue simultaneously that we shouldn’t be tied to former views (that we need to be open to “updating” things that now appear to be out-of-date. I’ve said more than once that I don’t think the WofW should be tied to membership, including baptism, but 1) moving from counsel to command after a generation or two and 2) confining the command change to the current prohibitions due to a radical increase in addiction-peddling (and sophisticated marketing techniques) seems to fit the general category of “updating” former things to reflect current situations.
It’s one thing to disagree with the changes, but the fact that the changes are reflective of different circumstances and, therefore, actually can be seen as “progressive” is easy to miss.
NotSure2008 wrote:I don’t think there is a thread on this anywhere. If there is I apologise – but I would like to have a further discussion on it. Alcohol, Smoking and Drugs are not the problems here…as I don’t do drugs, don’t smoke and I would rather not drink as I don’t like it and it makes me feel awful! Unfortunately I have a Mum who thinks its unsociable not to drink….grrrr…..The only thing I would ask regarding alcohol – is when it is used in cooking? what are your opinions on this?
Anyway – I love my Tea and not so much Coffee, but do drink it occassionally especially from Starbucks. I don’t really understand the problem behind Tea. I have a member-friend who mentioned to me that it is actually “hot drinks” and because they can damage your taste buds, throat, stomach etc? But wouldn’t this also include Hot Chocolate??
Maybe its being British – but I can see myself struggling to not drink tea.
Your thoughts?
Beer is endorsed by the Word of Wisdom. A mild drink made from barley.
Bruce R. Mcconkie suggested that “Hot Drinks” might refer to the temperature. The heat interferes with the gastric juices. He quoted someone, may have been Talmage. This would rule out hot chocolate and I’m pretty sure some early Church members wouldn’t eat hot soup. This is ludicrous IMO and I am pretty sure the Church stays far away from this position.
There is some interesting research on the fact that the WOW may have really arisen from the fact that tea and coffee were imports that were damaging to the Church’s economy. After all, Studies have shown that moderate amounts of tea and coffee are actually beneficial.
It’s a health code. Do what is healthy. The TR question is “do you live the word of wisdom”, not “do you drink tea?”
Treat your body like a temple and then answer the question in the affirmative. Don’t feel guilty about it. God knows your intentions.
Just my two cents
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.