Apostacy by 570 A.D / For Casen and us

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic-rcia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

catholic-rcia

Guest
Apostacy by 570 A.D

I think it would be a good idea to post the things that were happening in the Church from say 450 A.D. to say 650 A.D.

Who were the Saints? What did they write about etc… anything else you can find on the Church during these times.

Keeping in mind this Parable / is this not about our Church? Ourselves?

The Weeds in the Grain or the Tares
(Matt 13:24-30)

He proposed another parable to them. "The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a man who sowed good seed in his field While everyone was asleep his enemy came and sowed weeds all through the wheat, and then went off. When the crop grew and bore fruit, the weeds appeared as well. The slaves of the householder came to him and said, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where have the weeds come from? He answered, ‘An enemy has done this.’ His slaves said to him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up? He replied, 'No, if you pull up the weeds you might uproot the wheat along with them. Let them grow together until harvest; then at harvest time I will say to the harvesters,…

“First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles for burning; but gather the wheat into my barn.”’

God Bless
 
This could be interesting. I’m headed out the door and won’t be back until Thursday but I’ll chime in then.

Casen
 
40.png
catholic-rcia:
Keeping in mind this Parable / is this not about our Church? Ourselves?

The Weeds in the Grain or the Tares
(Matt 13:24-30)

He proposed another parable to them. "The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a man who sowed good seed in his field While everyone was asleep his enemy came and sowed weeds all through the wheat, and then went off. When the crop grew and bore fruit, the weeds appeared as well. The slaves of the householder came to him and said, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where have the weeds come from? He answered, ‘An enemy has done this.’ His slaves said to him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up? He replied, 'No, if you pull up the weeds you might uproot the wheat along with them. Let them grow together until harvest; then at harvest time I will say to the harvesters,…

“First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles for burning; but gather the wheat into my barn.”’

God Bless
Click to expand...
I wish I had replied to this earlier. My response was going to be somewhat simple and state that yes, the wheat and the tares do grow together. I place very little weight on the horrible actions or heretical teachings of past Popes and other historic Catholics when it comes to demonstrating the apostasy. In fact my most common use of such thing is to try and wake up Catholics who seem quite willing to declare the CoJCoLDS evil for the teachings or behaviors of men that do not approach the horrors evident and acknowledge by Catholics.

Strictly concerning the Apostasy I have posted on this before and no part of my position is that the Apostasy was caused by the evil members, and I also do not point to the existence of evil members as a reason for the apostasy. My ideas are still on this board although not in the LDS sub forum.

Now part of my reason for posting here is in response to recent posts by Jersusha and Imconfused. To adequately respond to them I would need to say some pretty horrible things about some past Catholics. To show things like the advocating of a theocracy from some past Catholics. To speak of some inquisition activities. To mention the selling of indulgences and the message conveyed during those sales. Many really ugly things. I would then suggest that LDS have these in our past to an extent, but it is more productive to compare best to best when interacting.

Anyway, I got rapped around the parable you mentioned because it involves an unanswered question in my mind (I think I have an answer now!)

Charity, TOm
 
40.png
TOmNossor:
I wish I had replied to this earlier. My response was going to be somewhat simple and state that yes, the wheat and the tares do grow together. I place very little weight on the horrible actions or heretical teachings of past Popes and other historic Catholics when it comes to demonstrating the apostasy. In fact my most common use of such thing is to try and wake up Catholics who seem quite willing to declare the CoJCoLDS evil for the teachings or behaviors of men that do not approach the horrors evident and acknowledge by Catholics.

Strictly concerning the Apostasy I have posted on this before and no part of my position is that the Apostasy was caused by the evil members, and I also do not point to the existence of evil members as a reason for the apostasy. My ideas are still on this board although not in the LDS sub forum.

Now part of my reason for posting here is in response to recent posts by Jersusha and Imconfused. To adequately respond to them I would need to say some pretty horrible things about some past Catholics. To show things like the advocating of a theocracy from some past Catholics. To speak of some inquisition activities. To mention the selling of indulgences and the message conveyed during those sales. Many really ugly things. I would then suggest that LDS have these in our past to an extent, but it is more productive to compare best to best when interacting.

Anyway, I got rapped around the parable you mentioned because it involves an unanswered question in my mind (I think I have an answer now!)

Charity, TOm
Click to expand...
The sins of the members of the Catholic Church, either in the past or now, in no way justifies the outright satanism of LDS. I’m sorry, but it is one of most idolatrous and superstitious religions I have ever seen and one of the marks of Satanic activity is elevating man and de-elevating God, which it has. Another mark is the obvious obfuscation of history and known facts. Even non catholics can’t get around it. Do you really believe you can excuse Mormonisms obvious attempts to compete with God by saying individuals in the Roman Church have committed sin?
 
How much weight do you place on the good grain? Do you search for this as much as you search for the bad of the Church? I myself would not want to spend a lot of time in that task. I would be careful in such matters. Is the Good Grain of the Catholic Church taught to you as a member of the LDS Church? Do you study the Saints? Jesus did not come to a worthy people to save them. He came to save sinners. We have sinners in His Church.

This is the beuty of it all. If you want to look for sin within the Catholic Church all you would have to do is go to Mass today.

We bring our sin to the Mass / Christ so that we can be healed from it. No Surprise.
 
“To adequately respond to them I would need to say some pretty horrible things about some past Catholics”

Feel free to place me among those as well. I am comfortable as a Catholic to be among such company. It;s why we have Jesus in our lives. And thank God for Him daily. The first will be last and the last will be first. It is a pride issue. Jesus would tell those horrible Catholics how much they are loved, in hopes that they would get it.

God Bless
 
40.png
catholic-rcia:
How much weight do you place on the good grain? Do you search for this as much as you search for the bad of the Church?

Surely you are directing this question to Catholics who write about LDS words and actions and declare them satanic. Correct?

I am the one who said that the existence of wheat or tares has little bearing on the truth claims of a specific church.

In fact, it seems to me that you place far too much emphasis upon the good actions of the Saints, when if fact they were sinners just like the rest of us.

I do not seek evil Catholics or Catholics who taught things that you and I would consider unchristian to confirm my beliefs in the CoJCoLDS. I recall things I have seen in response to Catholic who seem to only focus on the negative associated with my church. Do you not see some hypocrisy in directing your question at me as you have?

St. Thomas Aquinas is my favorite Catholic saint as I believe I have mentioned to you. Yes, I did hear him positively spoken of in my church (and not just by me). And to be honest, I do not ever recall Catholics being negatively spoke of in my church. Perhaps you have experiences a Mormonism that is different from what I have experienced.

Cardinal Newman is probably one of my favorite Catholic scholars. I have read a lot by him and I just ordered Vol 25 of his letters.

I too attend a church full of hypocrites and sinners. I am chief among them for I know of more evil within me than I have ever observed in others. But it is not I who try to find bad things and link them with other peoples churches so that I might lift up myself and my church. This is the action of many of the Catholics on this board.

Charity, TOm
 
It may, then, be advisable to work on yourself and your relationship with God, and work on reforming your church. It would be a much better thing than coming here to try to convert us.
 
“I do not ever recall Catholics being negatively spoke of in my church. Perhaps you have experiences a Mormonism that is different from what I have experienced.”

I do not attend a Church that is a result of another church’s fall. I attend a Church that is necessary because of the fall of each and every one of us. You can see this fallen nature in all people, in all Church’s. So it is crazy to be pointing it out, when we are each the one pointed to. Jesus established one Church because there is only one Jesus. Find Jesus and you have found His Church. You can find Him in many different denominations, in all baptised Christians. To say that the Church, Christianity in general apostatized is very arrogant. To say that it is your Church that restored it is above arrogance. To say that Christianity lost the priesthood is very arrogant and it demeans the Jesus that we have come to trust and rely on. Yes I have experienced what you say you have not. If speaking about an apostasy from what Christ established is not negative, tell me what is Tom. As a Catholic I am very aware of the meaning of Apostasy, again I thank Jesus for bringing me out of it by the way of His Cross. I do not need the LDS Church to enlighten me on my Saviors gift. I just experienced it once more at Mass today. It will sustain me until next week. Past that I trust in Him. Because it is all about Him.
 
If speaking about an apostasy from what Christ established is not negative, tell me what is Tom. As a Catholic I am very aware of the meaning of Apostasy, again I thank Jesus for bringing me out of it by the way of His Cross. I do not need the LDS Church to enlighten me on my Saviors gift
Click to expand...
work on yourself and your relationship with God, and work on reforming your church. It would be a much better thing than coming here to try to convert us.
Click to expand...
Tom, you have a choice. I know which one is the better. By taking the second, you may eventually find yourself accepting the first. But your role here, as self-delegated (?) missionary to Catholics already firm in their faith, is rather inappropriate. I see you have been hanging around this board for a year with no change, except perhaps, more anger, and more complex apologetics.
 
I guess I just am way off from RCIA’s intent of that particular parable.

See, the way I read it was, that the wholesale “apostacy” put forth by the CoJSoLDS would mean that, until JS, the Wheat would have been collected, leaving only the tares, until replanted by JS; in direct contradiction to the parable’s intent and literal teaching.

Since the Great Apostacy of the LDS is regarding Preisthood Authority, which is interpreted in a manner to eliminate true Baptism of Desire, then under this parable, the wheat was harvested with the deaths of the Apostles separate from the Tares, and was not replanted until JS resored the preisthood.

But, since I have obviously misread the point, I guess you can just dismiss my ramblings here 🙂
 
That’s good stuff…

We can all look at this parable and find many good meanings.
I see good and bad in myself, so as I began to learn more about the Catholic faith it was ok to see this in the church as well. It made complete sense to me. I go to Mass to be close to Christ in the Eucharist . He helps me see things for what they are and accept them. I have found Goodness in Christ and this goodness does tend to rub off on us. I trust that he will complete the good in us at the end of this life.
God Bless

I also see all of us as Prodigal sons and daughters, but that is another Parable.
 
I certainly agree with you on the personlization aspect of the parable (indeed, the great thing about them is they fit so many aspects of our existence); I guess I was just looking at it through the subject line lens, that is, from the “great apostacy” point of veiw.
 
Apostacy does not mean the belief in Jesus Christ was taken from the earth. It only means the authority to act in God’s name was taken. It could not pass through wicked men and when the Emperor Justinian took over Rome and made the Pope change some of the original beliefs of the Church as established by Jesus Christ, and also forced all people to be Catholic, even when they were pagans and heathens, the church could not exist in it’s original state any longer. Because of that the church was inundated with non believers and there was no longer any authority to act in God’s name. God still loved His people and the people still believed in Him and tried their best to worship and keep the faith, with all the evil that had entered the church. The Catholic Church kept the belief in Christ alive, but they lost the authority to act in God’s name. In spite of this loss of authority, the Catholic Church still did a great job spreading and keeping the faith in Jesus Christ alive.
The settling of America and the new freedom of religion in this world prepared the way for the authority and keys of the priesthood to be restored through the prophet Joseph Smith Jr. There is no other country or no other time that it could have happened. God did not only appear to the prophets of old as the Catholics claim, He has appeared to prophets in modern times and he continues to guide and lead our prophet today, Gordon B. Hinckley and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Since all men are sinners, there have been bad Catholics as well as bad Mormons, but through Jesus Christ and His atonement for our sins, we all have the opportunity to repent and live the commandments of God. We are all brothers and sisters in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
BJ 👍
 
I also want to add, that I do not see anything in the LDS posts berating Catholics and calling them evil or crazy or any of the ugly things the Catholics say about us. I have seen more evil words from some of these Catholics than I have ever seen anywhere in my life. I came here searching for answers about Catholics and stayed to clarify mis-information and hate filled posts about Mormons.
The hatred expressed here has made my husband question whether he wants to be a Catholic any more and he is now taking the Missionary lessons. So, what I could not do in 6 years you all have accomplished in a few months time. Amazing, thank you for your help.
BJ 👍
 
If that will be the basis for your husband’s decision, I’m very sorry for him. Does he know there are plenty of LDS forum-goers on the Net who are guilty of everything you think the Catholic forum-goers here are?
 
Actually, Colbert; I did point out that the LDS teach that the nature of the Great Apostacy is around the preisthood authority.

And as I also pointed out; it does not mitigate the implications of the teaching of the apostacy, as taught by the CoJCoLDS, being in contradiction to Jesus’ own teachings. Your church uses OT scripture, and the occasional NT reference to those OT scriptures, to “biblically” support the apostacy theory.

Personally, I think that JS was simply apeing the Protestant veiw of the Moral Preisthood being apostate in the RCC, and didn’t live long enough to consider the implications of that position upon the preisthood he started.

Perhaps, God willing, one day your Husband and yourself will come back to these boards, and see that there is less “hatred”, and far more frustration, than you see here now, and who/what the actual source of that is.

Until then, Peace be unto you.

Caritas numquam excidit
 
I would like to see this thread get back on track. I was watching it because I wanted to learn more about an historic time period that I have not personally studied.

Please all, remember this is not about hating each other or beliefs. Please check my location. I am in LDS central (north). We are second only to Utah in percentage of LDS. The Diocese of Boise has 120,000 Catholics. (The diocese covers the whole state BTW) There are 1 million people in my state. Catholics are the second largest religious group in Idaho. You do the math.

Until my best friend (LDS) and I became friends she thought all Catholics were crazy and I thought all “Mormons” were mean. Slinging anything back and forth doesn’t help. We do our best to understand each other.

Now all that said…she and I have discussed the apostacy, as she calls it, but cannot find out where we start to disagree. What was happening in ACTUAL Church teaching during that time period that LDS believe changed things? I know what corrupt members were doing. I am asking to show where Church teaching changed. To me the Catholic Church has not changed its teaching since it was established by Jesus.

There are pagans and heathens in both LDS and Catholic churches now. Many people have been forced to become LDS or Catholic. I do not see how these issues would remove authority from the faithful.
 
You LDS come to a Catholic forum. You post statements on the Catholic forum that are anti Catholic and put forth ridiculous arguments about it. Then you are upset because Catholics reject the teachings. Did the LDS such as Tom Nosser and CAsen and B.J. really expect to come to the Catholic Forum, the Catholic Church which possesses the fullness of truth, and have Catholics suddenly flocking to the LDS church? Perhaps you can give us something besides superstition, magic rituals, secret handshakes, skewed history, doublespeak theology typed in huge print, to go on here. What you have presented to us here is an outrageously racist religion that has cleaned itself up in the last 3 decades in order to be more PC. You have described a religion that is little more than the Freemasons gone grandiose. You’ve presented us with just one unspeakable heresy after another and are offended by our rejection of it. You have belittled our God, put Him in a position of servant of man’s will, elevated man over God, and given us a prophet who claims what Christ really meant was for true brothers and sisters to murder the sinner. You have presented tablets or something purporting to be from the Egyptian which known Egyptologists call pure nonsense. And then you give us a version of talking in tongues which in the Catholic Church is actually a sign of satanic possession and expect us to sanctify it by calling it a gift of the Holy Spirit. The gift of tongues you are talking about is NOT TONGUES. It is entirely different. You have given us a known confidence man as a prophet equal in stature to the holy prophets such as Elijah. You have used the New Testament and Christ’s words to justify murder of enemies. You have uttered just about every blasphemy against the Holy Mother of God a person can do in their lifetime. Just what exactly were you hoping for when you came here? Our thanks for helping us not be “apostate”? Please, LDS, remove the forest of wood from your own eyes before you come to the forum to remove our splinters. Can you comprehend at all the mercy and grace of a God who is still listening to you here? The Holy Mother Church, after you have insulted her in hundreds of ways is still listening to you. And still, you are not satisfied. You demand more.
 
Well, I have seen two distinct ideas regarding the GA;

The first is the Structural Argument: The Apostles died before transmitting their keys as apostles to other Chirsitians, and therefore the Apostacy occured because of the loss of those “keys”. As evidence, those who argue this pov, point to the passages in the NT wherein the highest position mentioned is a bishop. The confusion is, a bishop under the RCC is a much higher (within the hierarchy of the Church) postion than in the LDS church, where it is the lowest of the higher callings, with the “position” of Apostle being higher than a bishop. Remeber, one of the things “restored” by JS was the actual hierarchical structure of the church. This argument for the GA is countered with the knowledge of the RCC that a Bishop was the highest on the old food chain ever established, and that apostles are not higher than bishps, and so simply show their preistly succession lines.

The second line of reasoning (and the apparent one being questioned in this thread) is more complex due to disagreement over what, precisely, doctrines changed; but simply put, the theologians of the early church began to change the doctrine as taught by Jesus, and thereby caused the GA (and therefore not necessarily through their sin, just their hubris; so even the “good” catholics contributed to the GA), because all of their Councils caused the “philosophies of man” to insert themselves over the actual teaching of God. I suppose, technically speaking; any doctrine of the RCC that is different from the “restored Gospel” of the CoJCoLDS would be the false doctrines introduced by the errant ECFs.
I do not see how these issues would remove authority from the faithful.
Click to expand...
That is because you are Catholic. The RCC long ago came to the conclusion that the personal worthiness of a preisthood bearer did not alter the efficacy of the exersize of their preistly office. The LDS used to disagree. They took the Protestant view that a preist could lose the preisthood through immoral or unrighteous action (and technically this is still in the Standard Works, so it should still be a teaching of the LDS church).

Case in point: The RCC insists that ANYONE performing a Baptism, under the prescribed conditions (intent & formulae), can perform an effective and binding baptism. By contrast, the LDS assert that only baptisms performed under specific ritual by one with the preisthood given by the church can make a binding & effective baptism. Thus, one of those pagans in your Parish could, if needed, baptize someone as effectively as your bishop into the Church. The equivalent pagan at the local Ward, however, cannot baptize anyone unless they hold the actual preisthood, and are given the bishop’s leave. This is also why most christians baptized outside the RCC (like me) are still considered actual “baptized Christians”, even though not Catholics; and conversely, why everyone entering the LDS faith must be re-baptized.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top