Mormons and Quakers: Finding areas of religious agreement to reduce conflicts, offer dialogue

Portland, Oregon Mormon Temple

"I don't like religion," he said.  "All they do is argue about who is right.  Nobody gets along, and how can anyone be a believer in God and get that angry." Like many other people, Bill Shimabakuro, experienced religious differences, as his mother was Buddhist and his father Christian; and instead of this lending to appreciation of faith, their religious arguments got in the way of his wanting to have any religion at all.  So an examination of two different religious groups offers an opportunity to learn how to find similarities within religions to offer dialogue and reduce conflicts.

A review of the basic beliefs of Mormons and Quakers reveals that despite differences they have tenets in common. This permits reasoned discourse between these groups as is often demonstrated on World Religion Day and other interfaith events.

For both Quakers and Mormons revelation is continuous. Belief in the Holy Spirit's guidance is integral to both faiths.

In the Mormon Church revelation and prophecy belong to the priesthood, consisting only of men. The Prophet is the ultimate authority of the church and the oldest member of the Council of Elders. The current Prophet is Thomas S. Monson.

Women cannot be priests in the Mormon Church. They also can't become the Prophet of the Church, its ultimate authority, or the one who offers prophecy. Instead they have a group called the Relief Society, the function of which is to provide education and support to the family and community. On the other hand, among Quakers women occupy the highest offices within the religious organization throughout the world and were active in women's movements, including right to vote.

Mormons have a defined set of beliefs relative to the value of the family in its relationship to God, the church and the community as a whole. The father is the head of the family with the wife the nurturer of children and the support to the father's authority. Quakers also believe in the value
of the family as central to providing a strong community base and for the education and upbringing of children. The emphasis, however, is less on family responsibility, but on individual rights and responsibilities for whom each person is held accountable.

On World Religion Day several years ago, a Mormon elder reviewed some Mormon beliefs. On the matter of women's place in the church, Elder Michael Loftin, a church leader in Louisiana, explained women's roles are "different from men." His wife later added to this in her explanation on why Mormon women aren't allowed to be priests and said this came from the Prophet himself. "Women have special gifts. These gifts are expressed in women's spiritual connections to God and their awareness of their faith. Men, however, lag behind in religious expressions; and that is why they have responsibilities of the priesthood, to educate themselves and others."

The Mormon Church, or Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, was established when Joseph Smith, the prophet founder, found golden plates near his home that were said to have come from Mormon, a prophet of the 4th century, who wrote about the people of the Americas. These people, according to the plates said to be translated by Smith, were visited directly by Jesus, who spoke of His mission and purpose. Mormons, like Quakers, believe Jesus to be the Son of God, but don't believe in the concept of the Trinity as held by most Christian churches.

The purpose of living is to learn, according to Mormons, and to live in faith. They work towards the advancement of the individual toward a heaven that unites the deceased with the family and restores the body to its original form.

Quakers on the other hand work for peace and justice on earth. A basic tenet of Quaker belief is service to the poor and those suffering injustice and indignities.

For years the Mormon Church held African Americans as having the mark of Cain, the black skin, as punishment for Cain having killed Abel, his brother, as described in the Book of Genesis. They were therefore forbidden the priesthood. Prophetic revelation changed this belief, and African American men are now fully accepted into the priesthood. On June 8, 1978 Spencer Kimball, the LDS Prophet at the time, offered the following official statement, " We declare with soberness that the Lord has now make known his will for the blessing of all his children throughout the earth who will hearken to the voice of his authorized servants, and prepare themselves to receive every blessing of the gospel,"

By contrast, Quakers have been outspoken social advocates and were active abolitionists during the period of slavery. They ran many of the safe houses for escaped slaves and some suffered punishment and even death for their actions in helping free slaves in the South.

At the heart of the faith of both Mormons and Quakers is Jesus. Jesus is said to be the Son of God but not God Himself. Neither group believe in the Trinity as maintained by mainstream Christian groups.

Although there are are significant differences in social practices, social attitudes and specific forms of worship between Quakers and Mormons, a careful examination finds similarities that permit reasoned interfaith discourse, the kind that can reduce conflicts and offer dialogue to promote understanding.

Religion or cult: What's the difference?

Mormon missionaries in front of DC temple are often referred to as members of a cult

Recently in a discussion about an article comparing Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs and those of Quakers, a reader from France observed both as being "cults."  But what is a cult or a defined religion and are their national beliefs and historical precedents that make the definition difficult?

 Westboro Baptist Church protection in the United States raised the question about whether it is a religion worthy of being protected under the Constitution or a cult.  At the same time people who are members of a minority religion, such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Quakers or Mormons, are oftened referred to as belonging to a cult by someone somewhere.  How people view religion and what the law says it is can be very different.

The Supreme Court held in Snyder vs Phelps that the view of religion was not the major factor in the protection for free speech as much as the need for the public to have a forum for protest and offered a summation of its decision that declared Phelps, the controversial minister and head of the Westboro Baptist Church, had a right to protest at funerals because of the Constitutional protection of free speech granted to the public as opposed to viewing its stature as a religious organization.

Mitt Romney, a Mormon who ran in the Presidential primaries, found himself having to defend his Mormon faith. He had to reassure people he is a Christian and not just a member of a cult. That's because many folks in mainstream churches continue to define those outside the mainstream Christian groups as simply cults.

During the early years of most religions, new groups have been referred to as cults. When Jesus was born and called himself King of the Jews, he and his followers were dismissed as heretics. It brought about the crucifixion every bit as much as new Christian groups are dismissed for being different.

The Washington Post enumerates this criteria from the Internal Revenue Service

a distinct legal existence,
 a recognized creed and form of worship,
 a definite and distinct ecclesiastical government,
a formal code of doctrine and discipline
a distinct religious history,
a membership not associated with any other church or denomination,
 an organization of ordained ministers,
ordained ministers selected after completing prescribed studies,
 a literature of its own,
established places of worship, regular congregations, regular religious services, Sunday schools for religious instruction of the young, school for the preparation of its ministers.

This official description of what constitutes a religion is a not accepted by those who believe it is too restrictive in that it seems to favor large, formal organizations. There are religious groups that fall outside this criteria, such as the Unitarians, Quakers, Unity and Jehovah's Witnesses. They may meet in community centers or in private homes. Furthermore, their groups might be comparably smaller than the mainstream religious organizations.

Lawyers differ on the definition of religion, just as private people do. That means debate about what groups should be protected and which ones fall outside the protection of the First Amendment. For example, Westboro Baptist Church, whose members protest at the funerals of fallen soldiers, may have aberrant beliefs according to many, but their right to protest as a religious group has been upheld by the courts prior to the Supreme Court decision. Westboro Baptist Church might be outside the mainstream Baptist practices but the lower courts have protected their practices as within the definition of religion, although the Supreme Court emphasized the right to public protest as opposed to using the definition of a religion in order to make a decision.

Still many folks differ on the definition of religion remaining core criteria for
discussion. Media groups support reinforcement of the right of free speech protection as do many other groups that are not of a religious orientation..

Over time the definition of what constitutes religion is something that occurs gradually, as a group becomes more and more known and accepted by the culture. This is how Mormons have started to enter the mainstream, as two Governors, father and son, named Romney, have both been the highest officials of the State of Michigan. Their religion has had that popular microscope used to assess their beliefs.

Experts tell us people differ in what they define as religion according to their personal religious bias. That criteria means what constitutes religion is likely to continue to be part of the national debate, especially during elections, as it has been in modern times.  Furthermore the mainstream Catholic doctrine in Europe continues to reflect the major division between Protestant and Catholic beliefs in ways that have made the Lutherans and Anglicans cling to a partial relationship with Catholicism that would separate them from other Protestants. It is an effort to give these groups a greater level of authenticity as a religion so as not to be lumped with Protestants they consider not mainstream.

As the controversy continues in the United States, with the "in group" referring to any other religious group as a cult, just as the Catholic Church history may also reflect the ongoing stance of the entire Protestant community as in question.

Legal definition and social one uniquely different with respect to religion

Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City, Utah

Carol Forsloff -Several years ago a young woman described herself as a Mormon at a library in Natchitoches,Louisiana, and when she left the desk, the clerk said, "That's not a religion; it's a cult."  But what does the law say is the definition of religion?  And how is that definition different than the social one?

I told the clerk I was writing about religions. “That’s not one,” she said, “It’s a cult. They don’t believe like us."

Well, defining "us" might be difficult since there are diverse beliefs in any town, including one in the Bible Belt. 

“What makes you think so?” was the question asked of the clerk with the pretty, young face and the adamant opinion.

“I just know, don’t you.”

“Actually,” I said, “I don’t.  But it might be interesting to find out what the experts say about faith and how it is defined”

So what defines the difference between a cult and a religion?

Christianity was considered different enough to cause consternation to Romans and Jews alike when it first began. The divisions of Christianity have
called one another cults ever since, but what makes a religion legal?
The Church of Scientology is recognized over most of the world as a religion,
although some may define it as cult. Believers use this fact to recruit.
Others consider it a cult with a nefarious character. That’s true of
other groups as well. For example, the Branch Davidians were
controversial both before and after David Koresh.

The Internal Revenue Service gives this as definition :

a distinct legal existence, a recognized creed and form of worship, a definite and distinct ecclesiastical government, a formal code of doctrine and discipline a distinct religious history, a membership not associated with any other church or denomination, an organization of ordained ministers, ordained ministers selected after completing prescribed studies, a literature of its own, established places of worship, regular congregations, regular religious services, Sunday schools for religious instruction of the young, school for the preparation of its ministers.

But some wonder if this set of criteria of the IRS is accurate and if
it might just be biased and flawed.

One writer observes that it distinctly favors high or formal churches with
large congregations. Unitarians and Quakers often meet informally in
homes or small places. Some groups use a selection from different
religious literature. Some have history that is aligned with other
groups, but have such different characters that they couldn’t be
associated with the same group, such as the Quakers and Baptists who
left the Church of England at the same time and have a shared history in
some respects and unshared in others.

Lots of groups don’t have Sunday school for the young. So if it isn’t the IRS standard that is reasonable, what should be used?

It turns out the debate over the definition of religion is as old as history itself and the debate has gone on for ages. Even lawyers and nations have
had trouble sorting it out.

The problems involve the imposition of societal standards and judgments that can make a difference. So when it comes to protecting religion the application of the law requires a definition, but that definition brings debate.

Then there is identity religion where folks subscribe to a community but not
necessarily to a specific set of religious beliefs. That would include
many Jews, for example. In most places the laws that regulate religion
are usually oriented towards majority practices and the promotion of
specific groups to the community to be recognized.

The actual practice of faith means that in countries with large Christian
populations Christmas is a holiday and in Islamic countries laws that
permit the ritual slaughter of animals. So what is a religion?

The answer is really who applies to be one and over time is accepted after
enough fuss is made and enough adherents join in making a fuss that is
heard by those in control and power, according to those who
have reviewed this question.

With the debates raging in the world about religion in general, what about those religions outside of Christianity?  It appears, given the definitions that the traditional faith groups of Islam, Judaism and Buddhist, as well as others, are legally religions and not cults, despite how society might judge them.

Mormon is likely a religion, according to most of these rules.  The group is well-known and has  a little over 12 million members worldwide.  It also has specific creeds that set it apart from other faith groups.   That’s certainly enough to make it a religion according to the law.

Proxy baptism in Mormonism: A question of religious respect

[caption id="attachment_14274" align="alignleft" width="198"] Mormon Temple in San Diego[/caption]

Joel S. Hirschhorn--When John F. Kennedy ran for President, his Catholic religion became an issue during the campaign, specifically whether he would impose his beliefs on others.  While many people would consider religious bias unfair, nevertheless one’s beliefs are often represented as the core of an individual’s values and therefore a platform for questions when a key leadership position is proposed, such as President of the United States.

Mitt Romney is a senior, influential member of the Mormon Church, a religious group with many positive values that are often referenced by those who believe in the importance of family, community and faith.  The values of hard work, loyalty to one’s family and taking care of one’s own represent core beliefs in the Mormon Church and seen by many as a strong foundation for leadership and a model for Christian life.  But there are practices that are unique to Mormonism that may not be viewed as favorable to the larger community, and, in fact, have been upsetting to many people.  One of these is proxy baptism.

In a nutshell, proxy baptism refers to the Mormon practice of baptizing a living person on behalf of someone who is dead and was not a member of the Mormon Church.  The goal is to get that non-Mormon person into Mormon-defined heaven, which is totally different than what all other religions think of as heaven.  The dead person nor anyone related to the dead person does not necessarily give permission or express any desire to be so baptized.

Standing in for dead people are young Mormon men and women dressed in white robes in Mormon temple ceremonies worldwide, which is considered an honor for them.

Over time many people who are not Mormons have mounted attacks on this practice, viewing the Mormon practice as a serious invasion of their lives and beliefs.   One of these critics is Nobel-laureate Holocaust survivor, Elie Wiesel, who is a top official from the Simon Wiesenthal Center.  He has focused on the Mormon practice of posthumously baptizing Jewish victims of the Holocaust.  Despite his attempts to stop Mormons doing this and despite promises they would, the practice has continued.

It may be reasonable to ask Romney to declare in clear, unambiguous language whether he has participated in such proxy baptisms, whether he believes that this practice is appropriate, and whether or not he understands why non-Mormons would object to this practice.

Would Americans resent a US President that supports Mormon proxy baptizing?  Many certainly would if they knew about the practice and what it represents.

Officially, the Mormon Church has refused to abandon this practice.  “With deepest respect to our Jewish friends, the church cannot abandon fundamental aspects of its religious doctrine and practice,” the church says on its website, “and it should not be asked to do so.”  Many millions of non-Mormons have apparently been proxy baptized, including famous people: Adolph Hitler, Christopher Columbus, most signers of the US Declaration of Independence, Paul Revere, William Shakespeare, Golda Meir, Albert Einstein, President Obama’s mother and Irving Berlin, for example.  There is no attempt by the church to document that non-Mormons had expressed any desire to be baptized into the Mormon faith.  And the church attempts to limit proxy baptizing to a member’s or family member’s ancestors apparently have failed.

Interestingly, those in the Hindu faith have said that Hindu feelings would naturally be hurt if their ancestors were baptized without their will.  Similarly, the Catholic Church has also publicly objected to the Mormon baptism of its members.

US Senate Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid  is also a Mormon, so the question posed to Romney, a Republican,  is reasonable to ask Senator Reid as well because the practice of proxy baptism is imposed on non-Mormons.  It would be helpful to know whether elected officials endorse it.

In sum, the central issue regarding proxy baptism is respect for individual beliefs and practices for non-Mormons and their religious communities, to include those who are atheists as well as members of other religions and Christians of various views.    The question of proxy baptism goes to the heart of respecting people of all faiths and is therefore a reasonable and important question to ask of those whose job is to govern others.