A Catholic Look at Mormanism

[Telstar]

Hi Telstar, here is what I don’t understand on a personal level, LDS level, Biblical level, and on a specific scriptural level.

Personal
I can’t understand why a caring God is going to split up my loving marriage and somehow combine me, my wife, and children with 108 billion other people. Here is how NewSeeker put it,

I think the point that NewSeeker was trying to make, is that our love for one another will be perfected to the point that we will love everyone that we have ever known, and even those that we have never known, with the perfect love of God, which is infinitely greater than the love we have for our own family, here on earth. We will still love our family, but our love for them will be increased exponentially. At the same time, we will have the same love for every human being that is found worthy to dwell in the Presence of God, Himself, with that same filial love. We will love each other the way God loves us.

We will never again be separated from our family members or our dear friends that we knew on earth (except from those that are damned). The only difference will be that there will be no more need for us to separate ourselves from others by our former ‘titles of relationship’. We will all be equal “brothers and sisters” of Jesus Christ with God as our Eternal Father, all members of one, huge, loving family, to enjoy each others company for all eternity. How could that ever be seen as a negative?

LDS
As LDS it goes against our core doctrine of eternal families. Parley P. Pratt an apostle said it this way,

What he stated about our love being purified and perfected is exactly what I’m talking about, except for the part of there being any specific designation to our relationships with each other. We will all be unified by our perfect love of God, and each other. That was the whole point of Jesus telling us this:Matthew 22:[36] Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? [37] Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. [38] This is the greatest and the first commandment. [39] And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. [40] On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.

Bible
I can’t understand how this idea can be squared with larger biblical teaching.

Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. (1 Cor 11:11)

That will never change, unless one of them is damned.

And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together , let not man put asunder. (Mark 10:8-9)

The whole family of God will be “one flesh” in a similar way that husbands and wives are one flesh on earth. The only part that will be unnecessary, will be the part reserved for procreation. There will be no more need for procreation because we will no longer be having more children. The love of God is much more intense and gratifying than anything that could ever be shared between any husband and wife, on earth. That statement says that no man shall put asunder, but it certainly doesn’t say that God can’t do it. God can do whatever He likes to them. It’s His Law, and it only applies to us during our lives on earth.

Specific Scripture
In light of the above scriptures I can’t understand why the scriptures about “neither marry nor given in marriage” (Matt 22:23-30, Mark 12:18-25, Luke 20:27-36) are misundersthood. Marriages are not performed after the resurrection. But they are in force. Even a non-LDS scholar gets it right. He says:

Those passages are mostly just “misunderstood” by LDS and others who misinterpret them by their own false notions, and not by what they actually say. I don’t really consider what anyone else believes about them, either. The Catholic Church is the only one that has the full authority to interpret scripture, correctly. *2 Peter:[16] As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.*That’s why it’s so important to understand who you should or should not trust to interpret scripture for you. We can easily be deceived into believing just about anything when we follow someone that gets it wrong, or when we try to rely on our own faulty interpretations.

 

[PaulDupre]

I don’t think anyone has mentioned yet what happens at a sealing. Whether it is children to their parents or a couple to each other, during the ceremony each person is given a secret name. The person or persons to whom you are sealed get to know that secret name. When everyone ends up in heaven, supposedly we’re going to look much different than we do on earth. We’ll go around and ask different souls who they are. I envision we’ll wander around yelling various names until some soul hears us and says, “Yeah! That’s me!” We’ll know we met up with the right person because they’ll know our secret name.

A new sealing doesn’t change that. Our children will still know the first parent’s secret name. And that parent will know their child’s.

Hi Chepner,
As a former temple-worthy and endowed LDS, I can tell you that that is not quite accurate.

A temple-worthy member gets his/her “new name” during the washing & annointing immediately prior to taking out his/her endowment. New names are not given out during sealings.

At a marriage/sealing between a man and woman, the woman reveals her secret name to her new husband, but the wife never gets to know her husband’s secret name. Children do not know anyone’s secret name.

The idea of locating a person in heaven by his “new name” is also problematic. On a given day, everyone who takes out his temple endowment gets the same “new name”. There is one name per day for men and another for women. And the names are recycled periodically. So there will be hundreds of thousands of people (at least) wandering around heaven with the same name.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[NewSeeker]

I think the point that NewSeeker was trying to make, is that our love for one another will be perfected to the point that we will love everyone that we have ever known, and even those that we have never known, with the perfect love of God, which is infinitely greater than the love we have for our own family, here on earth. We will still love our family, but our love for them will be increased exponentially. At the same time, we will have the same love for every human being that is found worthy to dwell in the Presence of God, Himself, with that same filial love. We will love each other the way God loves us.

Yes, exactly. In heaven, we will love with the love that God has. God loves all equally without distinction (qualitative) or degree (quantitative). As you say, the love I have for my family will be perfected. So, too, will the love I have (or don’t have) for people not in my family. We all be one family, brothers and sisters, with God as our Father. The earthly sacrament of marriage is for bringing the spouses toward such perfection, along with the other sacraments.

 

[theidler]

"In the resurrection there will be no marrying nor giving in marriage; for all questions of marital status must be settled before that time, under the authority of the Holy Priesthood, which holds the power to seal in marriage for both time and eternity.” (Talmage, Jesus the Christ, p. 509)

Man’s problems are not God’s problems.

Right. And the Apostle John is still alive on earth too right?

 

[Khalid]

What is Talmage?

James Talmage was an Apostle (member of the Quorum of Twelve) of the Mormons who wrote an influential book called “Jesus the Christ”, which he is quoting. Another one that has been thoroughly absorbed in to Mormonism, but yet is not quoted to outsiders with much frequency, is Apostle Bruce McConkie’s “Mormon Doctrine”, generally in its (very substantially) revised edition. These two books, even more than the Book of Mormon itself, the Gospel Principles (which includes much of the aforementioned two), or Church History or the Discourses, and equal to or superior to the D&C and the writings of Brigham Young and Joseph Fielding Smith, are the doctrinal foundations (in the most solid form Mormonism ever obtains, for private devotion of those who’ve bought in, not the slippery version of missionaries and apologists) of “traditional Mormonism” (as compared to Mormon neo-orthodoxy).

 

[TexanKnight]

Right. And the Apostle John is still alive on earth too right?

That is the one the LDS here continue to dodge…if John and the three nephites never left the earth, and IF they were doing as Jesus commanded (go forth and teach and baptize) then there could never have been an apostasy…

 

[Janderich]

And how is that different than the scenario where a widow remarries, has more children with her second husband but remains sealed to her first husband. Her second husbands children will be sealed to her and her first husband, leaving him separated from his wife and children. Without his family for eternity, how is that caring.

Zaffiroborant, There are a number of these sealing “scenarios” that could be proposed involving death, divorce, and children. Honestly we don’t know how every situation will be resolved before the resurrection, but, these issues *will be *resolved. The fallen world we live in means that situations and circumstances like these will occur. They do cause frustration during mortality and some blessings are not now realized. However, we have been promised that no blessing will be denied the faithful.

People are harmed everyday who don’t deserve it. But that does not mean that innocent people will suffer into the eternities because of it. Nor does it mean that the law of eternal marriage is not in effect.

 

[Khalid]

I don’t think anyone has mentioned yet what happens at a sealing. Whether it is children to their parents or a couple to each other, during the ceremony each person is given a secret name. The person or persons to whom you are sealed get to know that secret name. When everyone ends up in heaven, supposedly we’re going to look much different than we do on earth. We’ll go around and ask different souls who they are. I envision we’ll wander around yelling various names until some soul hears us and says, “Yeah! That’s me!” We’ll know we met up with the right person because they’ll know our secret name.

A new sealing doesn’t change that. Our children will still know the first parent’s secret name. And that parent will know their child’s.

Of course, all this assumes that all souls from the same extended family end up in the same level of heaven (apparently the levels don’t mix; and I thought there were seven levels not three). And keep in mind, we hope our children don’t die until they are grown and have had children and grandchildren (and great grandchildren) of their own so they have more people to meet up with than just dad or step-dad.

Everyone of the same sex who goes through a Temple ceremony on the same day receives the same name, at least for the endowment (we all got Enoch - awesome name, better than many I’ve heard). I don’t know about sealing. We weren’t supposed to talk about it, but some did anyways, and lo and behold, we all received the same names (a temple recommend isn’t that hard to get).

 

[theidler]

That is the one the LDS here continue to dodge…if John and the three nephites never left the earth, and IF they were doing as Jesus commanded (go forth and teach and baptize) then there could never have been an apostasy…

True enough - where is the apostle John then? Why has he not revealed himself to the LDS Church? Why is he in hiding? Where is he in hiding?

 

[Janderich]

James Talmage was an Apostle (member of the Quorum of Twelve) of the Mormons who wrote an influential book called “Jesus the Christ”, which he is quoting. Another one that has been thoroughly absorbed in to Mormonism, but yet is not quoted to outsiders with much frequency, is Apostle Bruce McConkie’s “Mormon Doctrine”, generally in its (very substantially) revised edition. These two books, even more than the Book of Mormon itself, the Gospel Principles (which includes much of the aforementioned two), or Church History or the Discourses, and equal to or superior to the D&C and the writings of Brigham Young and Joseph Fielding Smith, are the doctrinal foundations (in the most solid form Mormonism ever obtains, for private devotion of those who’ve bought in, not the slippery version of missionaries and apologists) of “traditional Mormonism” (as compared to Mormon neo-orthodoxy).

You are correct about Elder James E. Talmage. He was one of the twelve apostles before his death and he is the one who wrote “Jesus the Christ”. However, your above statement about "Mormon Doctrine and “Jesus the Christ” being superior to the Book of Mormon and equal to the D&C etc. is of course incorrect.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I can’t understand why a caring God is going to split up my loving marriage and somehow combine me, my wife, and children with 108 billion other people. Here is how NewSeeker put it,

:

Why would a caring God split up the second husbands family, his children now part of some other mans eternal family. You have not explained how the mess that is sealing is so caring, it looks anything but caring to me. It is so ugly that it is obviously fashioned by man, and in this case a particular man for a particular purpose no doubt.

 

[Janderich]

True enough - where is the apostle John then? Why has he not revealed himself to the LDS Church? Why is he in hiding? Where is he in hiding?

He has come. He came with Peter and James and restored the Melchizedek Priesthood to both Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Refer to D&C 107:20.

 

[PaulDupre]

Everyone of the same sex who goes through a Temple ceremony on the same day receives the same name, at least for the endowment (we all got Enoch - awesome name, better than many I’ve heard). I don’t know about sealing. We weren’t supposed to talk about it, but some did anyways, and lo and behold, we all received the same names (a temple recommend isn’t that hard to get).

Cornelius here…



I found out when I took out my endowment with my missionary class at the MTC (back in 1977 was called the LTM). We all went to the Provo temple and got our secret new names at the washing and annointing (which was really creepy). The man who gave me the little piece of paper with the name “Cornelius” machine-printed on it told me that the name had been given to me by revelation and to be sure not to forget the name. They say that to everyone.

So when we were all bunched up in a crowd waiting to go into the endowment room, several of the nervous elders were glancing at their little pieces of paper. It would have been hard not to see that they all said “Cornelius”. So much for revelation, I thought.

I think that was the beginning of the end for me. And then the endowment itself…also very creepy.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[theidler]

He has come. He came with Peter and James and restored the Melchizedek Priesthood to both Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Refer to D&C 107:20.

Ok…but why did he wait to restore it? What was he doing for 1800 years or so?

 

[theidler]

Cornelius here…



I found out when I took out my endowment with my missionary class at the MTC (back in 1977 was called the LTM). We all went to the Provo temple and got our secret new names at the washing and annointing (which was really creepy). The man who gave me the little piece of paper with the name “Cornelius” machine-printed on it told me that the name had been given to me by revelation and to be sure not to forget the name. They say that to everyone.

So when we were all bunched up in a crowd waiting to go into the endowment room, several of the nervous elders were glancing at their little pieces of paper. It would have been hard not to see that they all said “Cornelius”. So much for revelation, I thought.

I think that was the beginning of the end for me. And then the endowment itself…also very creepy.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

Well, it’s nice to hear this kind of thing from someone who was LDS, rather than someone merely stating unfounded rumors and such. What else happens during the ceremonies in the temples???

 

[Khalid]

You are correct about Elder James E. Talmage. He was one of the twelve apostles before his death and he is the one who wrote “Jesus the Christ”. However, your above statement about "Mormon Doctrine and “Jesus the Christ” being superior to the Book of Mormon and equal to the D&C etc. is of course incorrect.

But, the Book of Mormon teaches none of the distinct doctrines of Mormonism - it teaches nothing out of line with standard, 19th-century American Protestantism. The D&C teaches very few Mormon distinctives. Those were elucidated, for the most part, by Brigham Young, and some by Joseph Smith, many published in the Times & Seasons and other Church-owned publications (it’s really taken a downturn in “original thought” in recent years, with the Ensign and all), and codified by several later authors, amongst them JF Smith, Talmage, and McConkie.

To the other poster: if the Apostle John was around to restore the Melchizedek priesthood - and in order to bestow a priesthood, one must hold it oneself - by definition, the Melchizedek priesthood was never lost, and could not be restored (because John had it).

 

[theidler]

But, the Book of Mormon teaches none of the distinct doctrines of Mormonism - it teaches nothing out of line with standard, 19th-century American Protestantism. The D&C teaches very few Mormon distinctives. Those were elucidated, for the most part, by Brigham Young, and some by Joseph Smith, many published in the Times & Seasons and other Church-owned publications (it’s really taken a downturn in “original thought” in recent years, with the Ensign and all), and codified by several later authors, amongst them JF Smith, Talmage, and McConkie.

True enough about the Book of Mormon being a pseudo-Protestant sort of work. But the D+C was downright bizarre when I read it - it came off as sort of off-the-cuff “visions”, and could have been had by any one of the other persons in history claiming to be a prophet of God (Ellen White is actually similar in this regard…). The most alarming ideas are found in the so-called Book of Abraham - it’s almost like a re-reading of Genesis, but with “the Gods” inserted where it once said “God”.

 

[Khalid]

He has come. He came with Peter and James and restored the Melchizedek Priesthood to both Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Refer to D&C 107:20.

And, in response to someone asking, in some thread, or stating, “the missionaries don’t even give you time to read the standard works”, I ordered a BoM (as I’ve said, I thought it would come with an envelope, and not two missionaries), and, talking to this missionaries, finished off 1 Nephit through Omni the first night, then asked for a D&C and Pearl of Great Price (a triple combination), finished everything from the Words of Mormon to 4 Nephi the next night, got the triple combination, and finished off the rest of the BoM, through Moroni, on the third night and 50 of the D&C that night, 50 of the D&C along with Moses, Abraham, Joseph Smith - Matthew and Joseph Smith - History, on the fourth night, and the balance of the the D&C and the two Official Declarations on the fifth.

On the ninth or tenth day I even managed to get a copy of the additional D&Cs through 168 used by the RLDS, and read them. I was a Muslim at the time, and found a striking parallel (not in Joseph Smith’s life, although there are plenty there as well) between the Sunni-Shi’a schism and the LDS-RLDS schism: the Sunnis emerged the majority, lead by a close friend but not by a blood relative of Muhammad, while a son(-in-law) made a claim, later on, and was supported by Muhammad’s daughter Fatima, ending in the Sunni (Abu Bakr) and Shi’a (Ali/Fatima) succession schism, a striking parallel to the Brigham Young - Emma Smith/Joseph Smith III LDS/RLDS succession schism, down to the types of kin ties involved, and the relative size of the two sects (85%/15%). There are also many small incidental details that are uncannily similar.

And, even at that rate, they almost wanted a commitment to baptism before I was done reading. The four missionary lessons took less than two weeks. I stopped drinking beer and smoking in front of the missionaries (not that I actually quit). By the time I learned more of the religion, I think one of the Elders was shaken in his faith by the time he was rotated out. The other missionary, I don’t think undomesticated equines could have shaken his faith.

 

[Khalid]

Well, it’s nice to hear this kind of thing from someone who was LDS, rather than someone merely stating unfounded rumors and such. What else happens during the ceremonies in the temples???

Not much. Some odd touching (with oil), some weird imagery, and some very unusual-feeling sex segregation in one part of the ceremony, where it nearly feels like one is in the proximity of a (chaste) Turkish harem, stylized veils and all. It felt and sounded very mechanical, as if everyone was playing/reciting a script that had been overplayed (which they were, especially obvious in the robotic words of anointing), without the numinous quality attached to it, that one is made to expect.

To borrow a phrase I’ve heard from both Mormons and non, It’s “sacred”, not “secret”.

 

[Khalid]

True enough about the Book of Mormon being a pseudo-Protestant sort of work. But the D+C was downright bizarre when I read it - it came off as sort of off-the-cuff “visions”, and could have been had by any one of the other persons in history claiming to be a prophet of God (Ellen White is actually similar in this regard…). The most alarming ideas are found in the so-called Book of Abraham - it’s almost like a re-reading of Genesis, but with “the Gods” inserted where it once said “God”.

If you want some crazy “off-the-cuff” vision stuff that’s better, more systematic, than almost anything else out there, read the Urantia Book. It’s actually a good work of fiction, with lots of seemingly-deep physics and space opera in it, like a believable version of Scientology crossed with Deepak Chopra’s quantum psychology (even more surprising given that it was written before 1950), it has a good back-story of its paranormal discovery, communication, and apparition, and… I won’t spoil the rest of it. It’s over 2000 pages long, under $20, and I’m surprised it’s not attracted a much larger following of the new-age-christian [sic] types.

It’s one of the few kinds of those books that I believe may actually have been inspired in some sense (as in, having a partially supernatural or paranormal origin), but from Hell instead of from Heaven. I have a unique theory of inspiration on pretty much every holy book known to man, and believe many of them have some form of inspiration, whether that is corrupted, as in a mirror darkly (according to the Talmudic tradition that YHWH spoke to all the tribes of the earth in all languages on Mount Sinai, but only the Jews listened), like the Bhagavad-Gita and the Rig-Veda, or from Satan (as in the Gnostic Gospels and part of the Koran), and some from purely human endeavors (most of the Koran and all of the ahadith, some of the Gnostic Gospels): Confucianists and Daoists agree that their books are of human origin, surprisingly.

There’s some overlap between “corrupted inspiration” and “demonic inspiration” as well - I’ve yet to figure out if they’re actually the same thing, but there’s some subjective, qualitative difference that seems to exist, in my readings. There seems to be a sort of Satanic loathing and venom and slyness and similarity to corrupted truth in the Koran, a certain, as I’ve said subjective, Hellish feel, that is absent from the others. There’s also some overlap between the qualitative “human effort” feel and the others, as well: maybe “corrupted human effort”, or, original sin? I wonder where the Book of Mormon fits. It has some of the venom of a Satanic work (with Jesus playing the role of a destroyer several times), and much of the feel of a human work.