BYU announces caffeinated beverages will be served on campus and at games

Why the change now? I don't buy the excuse "there wasn't a demand for it until now."

I've been thinking about this, and I think it may have gone something like this...



A few years ago, BYU top brass decides they want to sell caffeinated beverages, they are tired of having to bring in their own Diet Cokes, or having to drive off campus to get one (they are old and don't want to walk). And driving anywhere near campus is a nightmare because of all the students (drivers and pedestrians) not following traffic laws. So how do they reverse the decision without making it look like they're going back on some vital part of BYU? They put the claim out there that there is "no demand." Obviously the vast majority of people enjoy a delicious ice-cold caffeinated beverage, so it instantly raises an outcry and demand comes pouring in. Now, with the narrative set that the only reason there wasn't Coke before hand was because there was no demand and the clear demand now, they can make the switch.



Of course because this is BYU and the Church, it takes years to get even the most simple of changes in place and done because of the ridiculous levels of bureaucracy, but the deed gets done.

With the amount of change that has happened in the last year at BYU, it appears that either leadership is open to questioning why on existing policies or is at least willing to listen to differing opinions.

- Amnesty for honor code violations when reporting crimes like rape

- Addressing ecclesiastical endorsement for those with no religious affiliation (or dropped their affiliation)

- Easing the grooming standards to allow for some facial hair (I'd love to see that go further)

- Selling caffeinated beverages on campus (increasing revenue maybe?)



All those things to me are positives and I think address situations that have been problems in the past.

SenorCougar wrote:

i was asked by a nonLDS acquaintance years ago why I couldn't drink a cup of coffee? He then asked what coffee had that caffinated sodas didn't have. Was it the temperature of the caffine that caused the problem? Cold caffine ok,hot caffine prohibited He then asked if tabaco was prohibited, why was marijuana not specifically listed. Does that mean it is ok? Just an outsiders questions and points of view...

There's a pretty straightforward answer to this in my mind, and that is "we do what we are told by our prophets." We don't avoid alcohol and drugs simply because of the negative effects they have on health or spirituality---though those are nice side benefits---we avoid them to be obedient. And that obedience will give us both spiritual and physical benefits because it is backed by a God-given authority. If at any point there was a change to the word of wisdom to allow or disallow anything, those benefits would remain.



In other words, we don't just avoid coffee and tea because of some arbitrary number of chemicals that pass the cutoff point of "too many negative effects," but because doing so comes with with the blessings of obedience. And while there may be health advantages to avoiding caffeinated soda, and you would likely be wise to avoid them, there's no prophetic prohibition.



If Mormons were going merely based on overall health effects, how would we measure the overall good and bads of what science hands us every couple years via the the "red wine is good for you!" "tea has positive mental effects!" sort of studies? So I try to avoid that type of argument and focus on the fact that if God told me to never eat whole grain wheat and green vegetables ever again, I'd do it regardless as to what the research says about those things. Bad example maybe, because that would be a pretty easy one to give up.

Also, marijuana is definitely included in the word of wisdom if you go off of what has been said by recent prophets.

The winds of change.......

This is the first time I get to play the "I know someone who knows" game. And in this case I really do know someone who walks among those at the very top. This person is in the top 10 of the "most influential Mormons" list.

In discussing several changes at BYU and the Church in general (i.e. teacher councils and "Come follow me." for relief society and Mel. Priesthood), he indicated the brethren are facing diversity issues like never before - a natural product of great missionary work. They are working harder than ever before to understand climate and culture, and to find ways to stay true to eternal principles while not alienating members with out-of-date or out-of-culture practices.

He reports that focus groups and climate studies play a bigger role than ever before.

He likened it to preparing the field for a big harvest; for more changes coming.



We'll see

Fido wrote:

With the amount of change that has happened in the last year at BYU, it appears that either leadership is open to questioning why on existing policies or is at least willing to listen to differing opinions.

- Amnesty for honor code violations when reporting crimes like rape

- Addressing ecclesiastical endorsement for those with no religious affiliation (or dropped their affiliation)

- Easing the grooming standards to allow for some facial hair (I'd love to see that go further)

- Selling caffeinated beverages on campus (increasing revenue maybe?)



All those things to me are positives and I think address situations that have been problems in the past.

A few meandering thoughts:



Each of these issues was originally instituted at BYU under the presidency of Ernest L Wilkinson. Now, I'm not gonna knock Brother Wilkinson--others can do that far more ably than me. And one could make the argument that on net those policies were helpful. He was a man of and for his time.



But I wonder how the issue of caffeinated soft drinks gained so much widespread purchase. I mean, you had Mike Wallace asking the Prophet about it for Pete's sake! It was clearly a matter of orthopraxy, even if not orthodoxy. It's kinda what we're known for. I remember my parents teaching me that "we don't drink caffeine". But honestly, I don't really know where that comes from. Anyone else know how this all started?



And the 'no demand' argument is disappointingly lame. Strange, then, that the change happened under a lawyer (Worthen), when BYU has had a well-trained economist (Bateman) as a recent president, who could have just observed that it would be more efficient to let the market decide by allowing the beverages to be served. The fact that it was a matter of policy necessarily means that it wasn't a matter of economics.





PS. I agree that this should be moved to the Lounge. Still, it's a telling state of BYU football that this is the most exciting thing BYU-related to talk about, one month into the season. :~(

Ygridiron4ever wrote:

The winds of change.......

This is the first time I get to play the "I know someone who knows" game. And in this case I really do know someone who walks among those at the very top. This person is in the top 10 of the "most influential Mormons" list.

In discussing several changes at BYU and the Church in general (i.e. teacher councils and "Come follow me." for relief society and Mel. Priesthood), he indicated the brethren are facing diversity issues like never before - a natural product of great missionary work. They are working harder than ever before to understand climate and culture, and to find ways to stay true to eternal principles while not alienating members with out-of-date or out-of-culture practices.

He reports that focus groups and climate studies play a bigger role than ever before.

He likened it to preparing the field for a big harvest; for more changes coming.



We'll see

Other than caffeinated drinks at BYU, what "diversity" or "climate and culture" issues are you talking about?

I'm late to the thread, but have a few cents on the matter.



1) About 5 years ago there was an article in Forbes or Time, one of those big pubs, that discussed the Church's finances. Was a great article. I recommend reading it. It mentioned Mormons aren't allowed to drink caffeinated sodas. There was a big to-do about it and the church releases a statement saying drinking such sodas wasn't against the WoW. Well, BYU students pounced, prompting BYU to claim the only reason BYU didn't serve suck drinks was because there wasn't demand. BYU students pounced again. Petitions were passed around, emails sent, etc. The Church and BYU found themselves in a hard spot. Shortly thereafter the Church retracted their statement on caffeinated beverages and the leader of the bring-caffeine-to-BYU movement was pressured by his bishop to give up the cause (I know because I chatted with him on FB at the time). BYU leadership took some bruises those few weeks and I suspect it contributed to the recent change in policy.

2) It's complete hearsay, but a family friend of ours has some high-up connections within Church leadership. Rumor is there are a "bunch" of "big" changes in the works and the presidency is just waiting for when the new prophet is called.

3) The Church is bleeding members states side. Internationally the Church is growing. We're becoming much more of an international church than a U.S. church. While U.S. baptisms may be fine, the Church is having a real hard time holding onto Millennials born into the Church due in part to Church cultural things like no drinking Dr. Pepper. I am sure the change in women's garments is also a reflection of this.

Gunk wrote:

I'm late to the thread, but have a few cents on the matter.



1) About 5 years ago there was an article in Forbes or Time, one of those big pubs, that discussed the Church's finances. Was a great article. I recommend reading it. It mentioned Mormons aren't allowed to drink caffeinated sodas. There was a big to-do about it and the church releases a statement saying drinking such sodas wasn't against the WoW. Well, BYU students pounced, prompting BYU to claim the only reason BYU didn't serve suck drinks was because there wasn't demand. BYU students pounced again. Petitions were passed around, emails sent, etc. The Church and BYU found themselves in a hard spot. Shortly thereafter the Church retracted their statement on caffeinated beverages and the leader of the bring-caffeine-to-BYU movement was pressured by his bishop to give up the cause (I know because I chatted with him on FB at the time). BYU leadership took some bruises those few weeks and I suspect it contributed to the recent change in policy.

I like a Diet Coke (mainly to stay awake) as much as the next guy but anyone who made caffeinated drinks a movement at BYU, besides being a jackyewt, had way too much time on their hands.

2) It's complete hearsay, but a family friend of ours has some high-up connections within Church leadership. Rumor is there are a "bunch" of "big" changes in the works and the presidency is just waiting for when the new prophet is called.

I know you're just the messenger but these kind of rumors have been around for decades. I don't think we'll see "a bunch" of anything (because we don't need to) and I don't see the purpose in waiting for a new prophet even if there was.

3) The Church is bleeding members states side. Internationally the Church is growing. We're becoming much more of an international church than a U.S. church. While U.S. baptisms may be fine, the Church is having a real hard time holding onto Millennials born into the Church due in part to Church cultural things like no drinking Dr. Pepper. I am sure the change in women's garments is also a reflection of this.

The problem holding onto Millenials has less to do with caffenaited drinks and much more them being raised in a very liberal, secularized, and self-centered society which, unfortunately, many of them have embraced. Dr Pepper is the least of the problems with these types.

KingCoug wrote:

I'm late to the thread, but have a few cents on the matter.



1) About 5 years ago there was an article in Forbes or Time, one of those big pubs, that discussed the Church's finances. Was a great article. I recommend reading it. It mentioned Mormons aren't allowed to drink caffeinated sodas. There was a big to-do about it and the church releases a statement saying drinking such sodas wasn't against the WoW. Well, BYU students pounced, prompting BYU to claim the only reason BYU didn't serve suck drinks was because there wasn't demand. BYU students pounced again. Petitions were passed around, emails sent, etc. The Church and BYU found themselves in a hard spot. Shortly thereafter the Church retracted their statement on caffeinated beverages and the leader of the bring-caffeine-to-BYU movement was pressured by his bishop to give up the cause (I know because I chatted with him on FB at the time). BYU leadership took some bruises those few weeks and I suspect it contributed to the recent change in policy.

I like a Diet Coke (mainly to stay awake) as much as the next guy but anyone who made caffeinated drinks a movement at BYU, besides being a jackyewt, had way too much time on their hands.

2) It's complete hearsay, but a family friend of ours has some high-up connections within Church leadership. Rumor is there are a "bunch" of "big" changes in the works and the presidency is just waiting for when the new prophet is called.

I know you're just the messenger but these kind of rumors have been around for decades. I don't think we'll see "a bunch" of anything (because we don't need to) and I don't see the purpose in waiting for a new prophet even if there was.

3) The Church is bleeding members states side. Internationally the Church is growing. We're becoming much more of an international church than a U.S. church. While U.S. baptisms may be fine, the Church is having a real hard time holding onto Millennials born into the Church due in part to Church cultural things like no drinking Dr. Pepper. I am sure the change in women's garments is also a reflection of this.

The problem holding onto Millenials has less to do with caffenaited drinks and much more them being raised in a very liberal, secularized, and self-centered society which, unfortunately, many of them have embraced. Dr Pepper is the least of the problems with these types.

I think your post does a good job capturing the essence of what many Millennials and others, myself included (I am not a Millennial) find off-putting about the Church.



You're right, it's not about being able to drink a Coke. That's just a lightning rod. It's more about being able to be the person you feel/want to be instead of being crammed into a box dictated by someone else and then made to feel guilty anytime you so much as question the existence of a line. And, before you think I am talking about being able to sin and do whatever you want without consequences, I'm not.



Case in point, you immediately start labeling a BYU student a "jackyewt" because like many 20-somethings he was having a bit of fun. This same student had fellow students compare him to early apostates. He was called a lot worse than "jackyewt" and accused of sowing discord within the Church. He did nothing wrong, but was made to feel as though he committed one of the unpardonable sins. I'd rather be counted among "jackyewts" than zealots that turn on their own kind at a moment's notice.

Anyone who helped bring caffeine to BYU is a true American hero.

KingCoug wrote:

Other than caffeinated drinks at BYU, what "diversity" or "climate and culture" issues are you talking about?

Just a Gunk indicated in his post above, my source indicates that the 'diversity' and 'climate and culture' concerns are the focus of serious study... very serious, observation-based study.... and much prayer and council. And could result in changes that are just as impactful on the church as changing the age of mission eligibility. And they may move the pendulum a bit on the gender equality spectrum. Not gender-identity, mind you, but views of daughters and sons of heavenly parents.



No changes in life-saving ordinances or lessening of standards.



I agree that this topic should go to the lounge, and I fully acknowledge that this is also hearsay. But I will say that the individual I alluded to earlier and I speak at least weekly. And in his roles in the church he has sat with the first presidency many, many times. I think it is fair to say that he has had significant influence in the temporal dealings of the church.



I also find it interesting that yesterday in Ward Conference we had a visiting 70, and for the first time I can ever remember, he mentioned a heavenly mother in more than just a passing nod to her.



Final thought, then I'll stop: It is my personal belief, that changing the Sunday School and YM/YM curriculum to "Come Follow Me" has had the desired effect on the youth; making them much more conversant on gospel doctrine. I have seen some youth work through a mini 'crisis of faith' that they would not have had if they just sat and listened to a lecture. Learning, presenting, and discussing doctrinal topics has given them a very different experience.

Teacher councils have made a big difference in how instructors are utilizing 'Come Follow Me.'

It follows (for me at least) that changing Relief Society and Melchizedek Priesthood to that format will 'move the needle.' When each quorum or class spends the first Sunday in open discussion on topics that are relevant to that specific group, It will be a very different experience for those who have been taught previously assigned 'lessons' their entire church life.



I travel a lot and attend church all over the world. One Sunday I was in Atlanta and was one of only 4 Caucasians in the chapel. Even the first counselor in the Stake Presidency was Black. The primary kids went up front and sang a song to their mothers. Sisters in the congregation, wearing beautiful bonnets, stood and clapped along and took videos... in Sacrament meeting. I even took a picture so I could fit in!



The next Sunday I found myself in Cambridge where Tag Romney is the bishop of the same Ward over which his father once presided (he is the spitting image of Mitt, in appearance, mannerism, and vocal quality). Their Stake President also addressed the congregation there; he is a Professor of Macro Economics at MIT.



Can you imagine how different the first Sunday in Elders Quorum will be for those two Wards?



That's what I mean by cultural and climate issues that must be addressed by the church.





Oh, and Go Cougars!! Beat the Aggies!!

Not to go all churchy here but this quote from Jeffrey R. Holland in last conference seems apropos:

When we disparage our uniqueness or try to conform to fictitious stereotypes—stereotypes driven by an insatiable consumer culture and idealized beyond any possible realization by social media—we lose the richness of tone and timbre that God intended when He created a world of diversity.

If this sentiment is catching on among the church leadership, then eliminating stereotypical policies that extend beyond church doctrine regarding the word of wisdom and then being what to me amounts to dishonest regarding why BYU doesn't sell them is not a surprise and a welcome trend. Caffeinated beverages won't keep you out of the temple, why should they be banned from sale in BYU campus shops?

Gunk wrote:
I think your post does a good job capturing the essence of what many Millennials and others, myself included (I am not a Millennial) find off-putting about the Church.



You're right, it's not about being able to drink a Coke. That's just a lightning rod. It's more about being able to be the person you feel/want to be instead of being crammed into a box dictated by someone else and then made to feel guilty anytime you so much as question the existence of a line. And, before you think I am talking about being able to sin and do whatever you want without consequences, I'm not.



Case in point, you immediately start labeling a BYU student a "jackyewt" because like many 20-somethings he was having a bit of fun. This same student had fellow students compare him to early apostates. He was called a lot worse than "jackyewt" and accused of sowing discord within the Church. He did nothing wrong, but was made to feel as though he committed one of the unpardonable sins. I'd rather be counted among "jackyewts" than zealots that turn on their own kind at a moment's notice.

The explanation you give above isn't really why some Millenials have left the Church. It's because they have embraced the liberal/secular views of society today while rejecting the doctrines of the Church. Though I imagine they'd also argue they're just trying to be "the person they want to be." It's not a "cultural" thing for these types. That explanation doesn't go nearly deep enough to explain their disaffection. They reject the Plan of Salvation, the idea of a Restored Gospel (or any gospel), Joseph Smith as a prophet (or President Monson for that matter), the Proclamation on the Family (including the divinely inspired roles of men and women), and so on. In short, apostasy is a much better explanation than not being satisfied with cultural expectations and wanting to be themselves.



Now, to be clear, the guy at BYU certainly wasn't an apostate. But making it a "movement," to use your word, seems a bit riduculous. And let's be honest. We have seen people in the Church go from minor, trivial things that have really no eternal significance to more fundamental things that do.

Ygridiron4ever wrote:
may[/i] move the pendulum a bit on the gender equality spectrum. Not gender-identity, mind you, but views of daughters and sons of heavenly parents.



No changes in life-saving ordinances or lessening of standards.



I agree that this topic should go to the lounge, and I fully acknowledge that this is also hearsay. But I will say that the individual I alluded to earlier and I speak at least weekly. And in his roles in the church he has sat with the first presidency many, many times. I think it is fair to say that he has had significant influence in the temporal dealings of the church.



I also find it interesting that yesterday in Ward Conference we had a visiting 70, and for the first time I can ever remember, he mentioned a heavenly mother in more than just a passing nod to her.



Final thought, then I'll stop: It is my personal belief, that changing the Sunday School and YM/YM curriculum to "Come Follow Me" has had the desired effect on the youth; making them much more conversant on gospel doctrine. I have seen some youth work through a mini 'crisis of faith' that they would not have had if they just sat and listened to a lecture. Learning, presenting, and discussing doctrinal topics has given them a very different experience.

Teacher councils have made a big difference in how instructors are utilizing 'Come Follow Me.'

It follows (for me at least) that changing Relief Society and Melchizedek Priesthood to that format will 'move the needle.' When each quorum or class spends the first Sunday in open discussion on topics that are relevant to that specific group, It will be a very different experience for those who have been taught previously assigned 'lessons' their entire church life.



I travel a lot and attend church all over the world. One Sunday I was in Atlanta and was one of only 4 Caucasians in the chapel. Even the first counselor in the Stake Presidency was Black. The primary kids went up front and sang a song to their mothers. Sisters in the congregation, wearing beautiful bonnets, stood and clapped along and took videos... in Sacrament meeting. I even took a picture so I could fit in!



The next Sunday I found myself in Cambridge where Tag Romney is the bishop of the same Ward over which his father once presided (he is the spitting image of Mitt, in appearance, mannerism, and vocal quality). Their Stake President also addressed the congregation there; he is a Professor of Macro Economics at MIT.



Can you imagine how different the first Sunday in Elders Quorum will be for those two Wards?



That's what I mean by cultural and climate issues that must be addressed by the church.





Oh, and Go Cougars!! Beat the Aggies!!

I served a mission in Atlanta and attended mostly black wards where several of the women were wearing their "Sunday crowns." During Fast and Testimony meetings, when a member would be talking at the pulpit, you could hear some members in the congregation saying "Amen" or "Mmm hmm" just like one might expect in a more traditional black church. Certainly different from wards I attended growing up and living in Utah. And that was 20 years ago. But was any of this a concern? No.



So I'm still not clear on specifically what "diversity" or "climate and culture issues" we could possibly be talking about. The Church has been international in scope for decades. What new issues have suddenly popped up that the next Prophet has to deal with?



And as far as "gender equality," the only ones making that an issue (when it isnt one) are crazy types like Kate "Korihor" Kelly. And she's been excommunicated.

I've served as Elders Quorum President in a previous ward I lived in and had an interesting experience there. I had just grown out a goatee right before I was called. The Stake President (who also worked at LDS Church headquarters) called me in and asked if I would accept that calling. His next question was how attached I was to the facial hair. I just laughed it off and made a comment about it being new--but he didn't move on until I agreed to shave it off for the duration of my calling. I did because it wasn't a big deal to me--but then when I was calling counselors, one guy I suggested is a guy who also has facial hair and puts highlights in his hair. I was counseled that he would not be a good option and that I should focus on people who the ward "can look up to". I don't know if the Bishop knew something I didn't or if his comments were specifically concerning his grooming--but that always rubbed me a bit wrong.

I've since moved wards/stakes and have a goatee again. But I was called to be in the HP group leadership--and they said nothing about facial hair--though none of the SP have any. I'm not sure if that is just a "preference" thing or what--but facial hair has nothing to do with ones' worthiness or ability to serve. That is another area I'd like to see BYU and the church in general chill out a little over.

Fido wrote:

I've served as Elders Quorum President in a previous ward I lived in and had an interesting experience there. I had just grown out a goatee right before I was called. The Stake President (who also worked at LDS Church headquarters) called me in and asked if I would accept that calling. His next question was how attached I was to the facial hair. I just laughed it off and made a comment about it being new--but he didn't move on until I agreed to shave it off for the duration of my calling. I did because it wasn't a big deal to me--but then when I was calling counselors, one guy I suggested is a guy who also has facial hair and puts highlights in his hair. I was counseled that he would not be a good option and that I should focus on people who the ward "can look up to". I don't know if the Bishop knew something I didn't or if his comments were specifically concerning his grooming--but that always rubbed me a bit wrong.

I've since moved wards/stakes and have a goatee again. But I was called to be in the HP group leadership--and they said nothing about facial hair--though none of the SP have any. I'm not sure if that is just a "preference" thing or what--but facial hair has nothing to do with ones' worthiness or ability to serve. That is another area I'd like to see BYU and the church in general chill out a little over.

Agree 100%. For the most part I consider myself a good obedient LDS dude, but I would have rejected the calling over the beard. And I can't even grow a beard. :lol: But that is someone exercising unrighteous dominion in my book. Show me in Handbook 2 where it says I can't have a beard and be in a leadership calling. Sorry, but we need to get rid of leaders like this, IMO.

I asked the Stake President when I was called into a bishopric if I should shave -- told him I shaved for the mission, but had a beard card at BYU and hadn't shaved more than 5 times since the mission.



He told me he wasn't going to tell me what to do, but he did think that if one of the Brethren was asked, they would probably recommend I shave.



I haven't shaved, and it hasn't been a problem.

Put me in the category that thinks BYU should revise the honor code to remove the facial hair restrictions, and length of hair restrictions. Those are not based on eternal principles, like the rest of the honor code is...honesty, chastity, etc. I would retain the modest dress standard, because that is based on eternal principles of modesty/chastity, and is essentially a temple standard since clothing should cover the garments. But I wouldn't worry about how long someone's hair was or whether they shaved.

Fido wrote:

Not to go all churchy here but this quote from Jeffrey R. Holland in last conference seems apropos:

When we disparage our uniqueness or try to conform to fictitious stereotypes—stereotypes driven by an insatiable consumer culture and idealized beyond any possible realization by social media—we lose the richness of tone and timbre that God intended when He created a world of diversity.

If this sentiment is catching on among the church leadership, then eliminating stereotypical policies that extend beyond church doctrine regarding the word of wisdom and then being what to me amounts to dishonest regarding why BYU doesn't sell them is not a surprise and a welcome trend. Caffeinated beverages won't keep you out of the temple, why should they be banned from sale in BYU campus shops?

Holland's talk is a 180 from what we heard when I was growing up (80s - 90s). The message was we all needed to dress the same, have the same haircuts, etc. The more we stood out the better since we are supposed to be a "peculiar" people.



I served in Brazil. It wasn't uncommon for members to show up to church in a t-shirt. It never bothered me. I was just glad they were there. However, there were a lot of missionaries that would rag on such members. They'd say jokingly to these new members something along the lines of, "Now that you're baptised, we need to get you some better clothes." Guess what, these new converts rarely lasted. Were there other issues that kept such converts from staying, sure, but harping on their attire certainly did help them to feel loved and/or welcomed.



I heard from many members while in Brazil complain about the Church forcing U.S. culture on them.