I've taken online "which religion should you be?" quizzes before. The results will change depending on my mood, or which one I take, but I thought I'd share the results of one I took today with you:
1. Reform Judaism (100 %)
2. Mainline - Liberal Christian Protestants (76 %)
3. Liberal Quakers - Religious Society of Friends (76 %)
4. Bahai (75 %)
5. Orthodox Judaism (75 %)
6. Islam (70 %)
7. Unitarian Universalism (65 %)
8. Orthodox Quaker - Religious Society of Friends (55 %)
9. Sikhism (53 %)
10. Neo-Pagan (52 %)
11. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (52 %)
12. New Thought (51 %)
13. Secular Humanism (50 %)
14. Christian Science Church of Christ, Scientist (49 %)
15. Mainline - Conservative Christian Protestant (44 %)
16. Scientology (44 %)
17. Jainism (42 %)
18. New Age (42 %)
19. Eastern Orthodox (37 %)
20. Roman Catholic (37 %)
21. Mahayana Buddhism (36 %)
22. Theravada Buddhism (35 %)
23. Non-theist (34 %)
24. Jehovahs Witness (32 %)
25. Seventh Day Adventist (31 %)
26. Taoism (31 %)
27. Hinduism (22 %)
First, I was surprised how many liberal churches came up in my top 10. That probably has something to do with my not giving a crap about abortion.
I'm glad my Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic scores were tied, and that I'd make almost as good a Theravada Buddhist as I would a Mahayana Buddhist.
In general, looks like I'm not a good candidate for the "eastern" faiths, or the 2 kookiest homegrown American religions. I'm kind of surprised that Christian Science ranked as high as it did.
And bad news, Latter-Day Saints: despite my frequent posting about you, I'd be a better Sikh than I would a Mormon. Although they might argue that it's a statistical dead heat.
How is New Thought different from Secular Humanism? Are Neo-Pagan and New Age that dissimilar? And where the hell are the Swedenborgians on this list?
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
Monday, July 6, 2009
Monday, December 15, 2008
My beef with the Salvation Army
I kind of admire the Salvation Army. What's not to like about a coed, militaristic / semi-monastic protestant religious order that dresses up in uniforms, does charity work, and has their own marching bands?
I'll tell you what's not to like: the folks ringing the bell around Christmas-time.
See, if the person ringing the bell was in uniform (a Salvation Army Soldier or Officer), that would be one thing. And keep in mind that when you see commercials about giving to the Salvation Army, that's how the bell-ringers are depicted. Nice looking, young adult to middle aged people in immaculate uniforms, ringing that big-assed brass bell with gusto on a busy street corner. Giving to them is like giving to a priest or a nun. Or buying brandy off a monk. It gives you a nice warm feeling.
Here's the reality, at least in my neck of the woods: a person in a sweatsuit stands inside the foyer of a Wal-Mart and halfheartedly rings their annoyingly tinny bell. They're not members of the Salvation Army - for them, it's just a minimum wage job 6 weeks a year. I have no idea if the money in that bucket ever makes it back to the Salvation Army. Why should I risk it?
The guy or gal in a uniform? They're living at the local Salvation Army barracks. I told you, they're semi-monastic. Where are they going to hide their bucket? They're not. That money has a pretty good shot of going directly to charity.
Maybe there are some places in the greater Dallas area where you can go and see actual members of the Salvation Army ringing a bell. I don't get out much. I know they have a local commandery, or constabulary, or whatever their local congregations are called.
Until I see one of those nice-looking uniformed men or women like I see on TV ringing the bell, screw it, I'm hanging on to my spare change. If I see the right person ringing the bell, I might donate paper money. Think about that, Salvation Army.
Check out the rest of my blog!
I'll tell you what's not to like: the folks ringing the bell around Christmas-time.
See, if the person ringing the bell was in uniform (a Salvation Army Soldier or Officer), that would be one thing. And keep in mind that when you see commercials about giving to the Salvation Army, that's how the bell-ringers are depicted. Nice looking, young adult to middle aged people in immaculate uniforms, ringing that big-assed brass bell with gusto on a busy street corner. Giving to them is like giving to a priest or a nun. Or buying brandy off a monk. It gives you a nice warm feeling.
Here's the reality, at least in my neck of the woods: a person in a sweatsuit stands inside the foyer of a Wal-Mart and halfheartedly rings their annoyingly tinny bell. They're not members of the Salvation Army - for them, it's just a minimum wage job 6 weeks a year. I have no idea if the money in that bucket ever makes it back to the Salvation Army. Why should I risk it?
The guy or gal in a uniform? They're living at the local Salvation Army barracks. I told you, they're semi-monastic. Where are they going to hide their bucket? They're not. That money has a pretty good shot of going directly to charity.
Maybe there are some places in the greater Dallas area where you can go and see actual members of the Salvation Army ringing a bell. I don't get out much. I know they have a local commandery, or constabulary, or whatever their local congregations are called.
Until I see one of those nice-looking uniformed men or women like I see on TV ringing the bell, screw it, I'm hanging on to my spare change. If I see the right person ringing the bell, I might donate paper money. Think about that, Salvation Army.
Check out the rest of my blog!
Monday, December 8, 2008
Boycot this!
I've heard that Gays are calling for boycotts of all things Mormon, based on the overwhelming Mormon financial support of California's Proposition 8.
Well Gays, I am throwing down the Gay Gauntlet to you. Will you boycott Robert Pattinson, sexy young man-star of the film 'Twilight'?
Yes, I've heard Lynn & Alex from L.A. Rag Mag on the Adam Carolla show, dishing about how hunky Robert is as Vampire-boy. But here's the problem: the novel Twilight was written by a Mormon. So by supporting the film, you are supporting a dues-paying member of the LDS Church.
(Although in all honesty, surely there are enough Mormons in California that you can find one involved in some way with many, many movies, and would have to boycott them all to make sure your film-going dollar didn't support any Mormons...)
So, what'll it be, my Gay brethren? Will you turn your back on sweet young Robert Pattinson in order to deprive the creator of the Twilight series (nay, the Twilight Saga!) from earning income? Or will you admit that boycotting a religion is kind of a stupid thing to do?
It's a good thing the Mormons are so polite. Seriously, they could accuse you all of intolerance, and then we would have sexual-preference-minority on persecuted-religion-minority hate crime situation going on.
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
Monday, October 27, 2008
CofE pulls a Fonzie
Is it possible for an entire religious denomination to jump the shark?
The Church of England is going to find out.
I don't know what's worse: the new prayer itself, or the fact that it has caused web traffic at the CofE's website to spike. What's the conversation that culminates in someone visiting this web site?
"Dear, I've got a bit of a dilemma on my hands."
"What's that, love?"
"I want to pray for the solvency of our financial institutions and easing up of inflationary pressures, because I assume an omniscient deity might not entirely understand how important those issues are to our everyday lives."
"Go ahead and pray, then."
"I'd like to, but I don't want to cock it up." (Blogger's note: I assume that's how British people talk.)
"How's that?"
"I reason I only have one chance at swaying the Almighty, and I want to get it right the first time. If I stutter or wander off-topic he mightn't take me seriously."
"Well, you're in luck, my duck. You recall that we're regular attendees at the Church of England?"
"Too well, I do. Thank God that our beloved Henry VIII brought us out from under the unruly thumb of the Roman Papacy in 1534 AD."
"Yes, that was a close call. At any rate, the same Church of England that Henry VIII established has now provided the very guidance you seek."
"Tell me more!"
"Indeed I shall. Simply visit the moderately holy official website of the Church of England, and you can find the new 'Prayer for the Current Financial Situation.' It's guaranteed to please Our Lord, and has a better than average chance of bringing about the result you desire."
"Outstanding!"
"Yes, but be sure to do it quickly. As the financial situation changes, the exact wording of the prayer may need to be adjusted. Hedge funds alone present such a thorny theological problem that it will take the General Synod some time to determine the most efficient liturgical course of action."
"To Coventry Cathedral!"
So, yeah. I hope you Anglicans are enjoying your crazy-ass Archbishop of Canterbury.
Check out the rest of my blog!
The Church of England is going to find out.
I don't know what's worse: the new prayer itself, or the fact that it has caused web traffic at the CofE's website to spike. What's the conversation that culminates in someone visiting this web site?
"Dear, I've got a bit of a dilemma on my hands."
"What's that, love?"
"I want to pray for the solvency of our financial institutions and easing up of inflationary pressures, because I assume an omniscient deity might not entirely understand how important those issues are to our everyday lives."
"Go ahead and pray, then."
"I'd like to, but I don't want to cock it up." (Blogger's note: I assume that's how British people talk.)
"How's that?"
"I reason I only have one chance at swaying the Almighty, and I want to get it right the first time. If I stutter or wander off-topic he mightn't take me seriously."
"Well, you're in luck, my duck. You recall that we're regular attendees at the Church of England?"
"Too well, I do. Thank God that our beloved Henry VIII brought us out from under the unruly thumb of the Roman Papacy in 1534 AD."
"Yes, that was a close call. At any rate, the same Church of England that Henry VIII established has now provided the very guidance you seek."
"Tell me more!"
"Indeed I shall. Simply visit the moderately holy official website of the Church of England, and you can find the new 'Prayer for the Current Financial Situation.' It's guaranteed to please Our Lord, and has a better than average chance of bringing about the result you desire."
"Outstanding!"
"Yes, but be sure to do it quickly. As the financial situation changes, the exact wording of the prayer may need to be adjusted. Hedge funds alone present such a thorny theological problem that it will take the General Synod some time to determine the most efficient liturgical course of action."
"To Coventry Cathedral!"
So, yeah. I hope you Anglicans are enjoying your crazy-ass Archbishop of Canterbury.
Check out the rest of my blog!
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
My thoughts about 'Prophet of the Restoration'
By now I'm guessing everyone who is going to watch those 'Prophet of the Restoration' YouTube clips has watched it, and those that aren't, aren't.
So, for your reading pleasure, here are the notes I made a mere hour after watching the movie in the theater, as it were. I could change them to make them better, but instead I present them here in their original state:
Joseph Smith: Prophet of the Restoration (60 min.)
-General overview of the movie available on Wikipedia. Overall impression: surprisingly good!
-The scenes of the father & daughter from England were not great - combination of bad writing & bad acting there.
-The flashback scenes were better and were very effective. Costumes, settings, production values, music, etc. all good.
-I thought the movie would be more about the church & its beliefs, but it was really the more personal story of Joseph Smith.
-That being said, I have a number of critical things to say about the film. Some are more relevant than others.
-The first is about accents. If Joseph Smith was born in the early 1800s and grew up in the NE, he must have had a hell of an accent on him. But everything in the film was done with a very modern general American accent. Everything except the English girl & her father, and the young Scottish couple. Those four people sounded like Americans trying (and not succeeding) in doing English and Scottish accents. Well, maybe the Scottish wife was OK. The other three were crap!
-The second is about general propriety - there were a number of scenes with Joseph Smith & Emma Hale during their courtship, with nary a chaperone to be found. In the 1830s? Player please.
-Third: when Joseph was shown translating the golden tablets, he wasn't using the seer stones. He was just reading off the plates, albeit slowly.
(Incidentally - learned new thing - the first two thirds of the plates were "bound" so Joseph couldn't translate them. The other third was what became the Book of Mormon.)
-Fourth: When Joseph & disciples were in Jail in Missouri, there were really bad taunts thrown at him. "Hey, Joseph, where's your faith?! Looks like God forgot you!" Failure of writing there.
-Fifth: The film really glosses over a number of things that later became controversial. Not that I particularly blame the filmmakers for doing so. The movie is designed to present the church's history in the best light possible. But, notably, it made no mention of polygamy or of Joseph taking multiple wives, or of how mightily this pissed Emma off. In this version, Joseph was the dedicated husband throughout. Additionally, while it showed Moroni coming to Joseph to tell him about the plates, it never mentioned the central premise of the BOM - that Israelite tribes came to the Americas and formed the basis of modern American Indians (after God turned their skin red, of course). It shows Mormon missionaries going out to preach the good word to all the world. Or, as far as I could tell from the film, all the White world. I'm guessing it was quite some time later before they began trying to convert non-Whites.
-Sixth: Deserving of a separate point along with being a "glossing over" issue, it showed Joseph being Friend to the Negro. Very welcoming to the blacks, and helping out. Never mind that blacks weren't accepted into the priesthood until 150+ years later.
-Seventh: Showed Joseph curing people of malaria (even if they'd already died) in Nauvoo by laying on hands. Surely that wasn't invented solely for the film - must be a tenet.
-Eighth: Ending music was bagpiped 'Scotland the Brave' - not that I particularly mind, but that can't translate well in the Spanish-language version. And then they took the tune and made a hymn out of it… oh, my poor Scottish folk song.
-----------------------
Overall verdict: a very mass-market, cleaned-up version of the Joseph Smith story. I'm currently reading 'No Man Knows My History', a not-too-friendly biography of Smith, so that's filling in a lot of interesting gaps that the film made. Good production values, OK script. I've seen many worse films.
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
So, for your reading pleasure, here are the notes I made a mere hour after watching the movie in the theater, as it were. I could change them to make them better, but instead I present them here in their original state:
Joseph Smith: Prophet of the Restoration (60 min.)
-General overview of the movie available on Wikipedia. Overall impression: surprisingly good!
-The scenes of the father & daughter from England were not great - combination of bad writing & bad acting there.
-The flashback scenes were better and were very effective. Costumes, settings, production values, music, etc. all good.
-I thought the movie would be more about the church & its beliefs, but it was really the more personal story of Joseph Smith.
-That being said, I have a number of critical things to say about the film. Some are more relevant than others.
-The first is about accents. If Joseph Smith was born in the early 1800s and grew up in the NE, he must have had a hell of an accent on him. But everything in the film was done with a very modern general American accent. Everything except the English girl & her father, and the young Scottish couple. Those four people sounded like Americans trying (and not succeeding) in doing English and Scottish accents. Well, maybe the Scottish wife was OK. The other three were crap!
-The second is about general propriety - there were a number of scenes with Joseph Smith & Emma Hale during their courtship, with nary a chaperone to be found. In the 1830s? Player please.
-Third: when Joseph was shown translating the golden tablets, he wasn't using the seer stones. He was just reading off the plates, albeit slowly.
(Incidentally - learned new thing - the first two thirds of the plates were "bound" so Joseph couldn't translate them. The other third was what became the Book of Mormon.)
-Fourth: When Joseph & disciples were in Jail in Missouri, there were really bad taunts thrown at him. "Hey, Joseph, where's your faith?! Looks like God forgot you!" Failure of writing there.
-Fifth: The film really glosses over a number of things that later became controversial. Not that I particularly blame the filmmakers for doing so. The movie is designed to present the church's history in the best light possible. But, notably, it made no mention of polygamy or of Joseph taking multiple wives, or of how mightily this pissed Emma off. In this version, Joseph was the dedicated husband throughout. Additionally, while it showed Moroni coming to Joseph to tell him about the plates, it never mentioned the central premise of the BOM - that Israelite tribes came to the Americas and formed the basis of modern American Indians (after God turned their skin red, of course). It shows Mormon missionaries going out to preach the good word to all the world. Or, as far as I could tell from the film, all the White world. I'm guessing it was quite some time later before they began trying to convert non-Whites.
-Sixth: Deserving of a separate point along with being a "glossing over" issue, it showed Joseph being Friend to the Negro. Very welcoming to the blacks, and helping out. Never mind that blacks weren't accepted into the priesthood until 150+ years later.
-Seventh: Showed Joseph curing people of malaria (even if they'd already died) in Nauvoo by laying on hands. Surely that wasn't invented solely for the film - must be a tenet.
-Eighth: Ending music was bagpiped 'Scotland the Brave' - not that I particularly mind, but that can't translate well in the Spanish-language version. And then they took the tune and made a hymn out of it… oh, my poor Scottish folk song.
-----------------------
Overall verdict: a very mass-market, cleaned-up version of the Joseph Smith story. I'm currently reading 'No Man Knows My History', a not-too-friendly biography of Smith, so that's filling in a lot of interesting gaps that the film made. Good production values, OK script. I've seen many worse films.
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Joseph Smith, Prophet of the Restoration: in Convenient YouTube Format!
Last year when I went to San Diego, I saw this flick at the Mormon Battalion museum. Fortunately, now you don't have to go to a Mormon-affiliated location to catch it, because some kind soul has uploaded the videos to YouTube. The picture is a little squishy, but you get the general idea.
I'll post my thoughts on the movie in a separate post. For now, enjoy:
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
I'll post my thoughts on the movie in a separate post. For now, enjoy:
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
Monday, July 21, 2008
Koran update
Brief update to my previous entry on the Koran being available for free (if you live in Houston and it showed up on your doorstep) or for the cost of shipping (less than $5) from the Book of Signs Foundation:
I stopped by Half Price Books last week over lunch, and took a gander in the Religion section. They had a Book of Signs-issued Koran for sale - for $7.50!
I rarely fault Half Price Books' pricing scheme, but when you sell the Book of Mormon (the Mormons don't charge you, and they'll cover the shipping costs or have missionaries bring it by directly), the Koran, or the King James Version of the Bible (again, free thanks to the Mormons or if you swipe a copy from the Gideons from a hotel room) at a cost well above where it is available elsewhere, you've got a problem.
Then again, I suppose holy books from active, proselytizing religions are much more the exception than the rule, because it's to their benefit to get their book in your hands as quickly as possible. On the other hand, I think I would have a relatively harder time getting hold of a copy of the Guru Granth Sahib (Sikh holy book).
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
I stopped by Half Price Books last week over lunch, and took a gander in the Religion section. They had a Book of Signs-issued Koran for sale - for $7.50!
I rarely fault Half Price Books' pricing scheme, but when you sell the Book of Mormon (the Mormons don't charge you, and they'll cover the shipping costs or have missionaries bring it by directly), the Koran, or the King James Version of the Bible (again, free thanks to the Mormons or if you swipe a copy from the Gideons from a hotel room) at a cost well above where it is available elsewhere, you've got a problem.
Then again, I suppose holy books from active, proselytizing religions are much more the exception than the rule, because it's to their benefit to get their book in your hands as quickly as possible. On the other hand, I think I would have a relatively harder time getting hold of a copy of the Guru Granth Sahib (Sikh holy book).
Thanks for visiting Mormania!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
