Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
Why is the story being changed now after all these years, which is the truth the old story or the new one?
- Status
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
I think StephenKent was trying to formulate a argument to be made with a relative of his who left Mormonism, and converted to Catholicism, based on its teachings on polygamy. The argument being, if the Catholic Church was once upon a time OK with polygamy, couldn’t a person who has serious objections to Mormon polygamy “forgive” the Mormon Church for what it teaches and “just go along with it”?
Personally, as someone who has serious objections to Mormon polygamy, lonngggg before I converted to Catholicism…he isn’t understanding, or maybe just not acknowledging, just how incredibly wrong Mormon polygamy is. From its inception by Joseph Smith to what the Mormon church teaches today (or covers up and doesn’t teach). There is NO way, in good conscience, to reconcile yourself to it. Ever.
The better question is, why would you want to?
Personally, as someone who has serious objections to Mormon polygamy, lonngggg before I converted to Catholicism…he isn’t understanding, or maybe just not acknowledging, just how incredibly wrong Mormon polygamy is. From its inception by Joseph Smith to what the Mormon church teaches today (or covers up and doesn’t teach). There is NO way, in good conscience, to reconcile yourself to it. Ever.
The better question is, why would you want to?
F
Fatboys
Guest
Sexually active during their pontificate
Along with other complaints, the activities of the popes between 1458 to 1565, helped encourage the Protestant Revolt.
Pope Sergius III (904–911) was supposedly the father of Pope John XI by Marozia, according to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosisfmg.ac/FMG/Popes.pdf Lindsay Brook, “Popes and pornocrats: Rome in the Early Middle Ages”, as well as the Liber PontificalisLiber Pontificalis (first ed., 500s; it has papal biographies up to Pius II, d. 1464). However it must be noted that this is disputed by another early source, the annalist Flodoard (c. 894-966), John XI was brother of Alberic II, the latter being the offspring of Marozia and her husband Alberic I. Hence John too may have been the son of Marozia and Alberic I. Bertrand Fauvarque underlines that the contemporary sources backing up this parenthood are dubious, Liutprand being “prone to exaggeration” while other mentions of this fatherhood appear in satires written by supporters of late Pope Formosus.Fauvarque, Bertrand (2003). “De la tutelle de l’aristocratie italienne à celle des empereurs germaniques”. In Y.-M. Hilaire (Ed.), Histoire de la papauté, 2000 ans de missions et de tribulations. Paris:Tallandier. ISBN 2-02-059006-9, p. 163.
Pope John X (914–928) had romantic affairs with both Theodora and her daughter Marozia, according to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosisfmg.ac/FMG/Popes.pdf Lindsay Brook, “Popes and pornocrats: Rome in the Early Middle Ages”: “The first of the popes to be created by a woman and now destroyed by her daughter”. (See also Saeculum obscurum)
Pope John XII (955–963) (deposed by Conclave) was said to have turned the Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano into a brothel and was accused of adultery, fornication, and incest (Source: Patrologia Latina).Template:Cite book p. 105 The monk chronicler Benedict of Soracte noted in his volume XXXVII that he “liked to have a collection of women”. According to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosisfmg.ac/FMG/Popes.pdf Lindsay Brook, “Popes and pornocrats: Rome in the Early Middle Ages”, “they testified about his adultery, which they did not see with their own eyes, but nonetheless knew with certainty: he had fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father’s concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse.” According to The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, John XII was “a Christian Caligula whose crimes were rendered particularly horrific by the office he held”.The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, Oxford University Press, 1986He was killed by a jealous husband while in the act of committing adultery with the man’s wife.Peter de Rosa, “Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy”, Poolbeg Press, Dublin 1988/2000, pages 211-215.Hans Kung, “The Catholic Church: A Short History” (translated by John Bowden), Modern Library, New York. 2001/2003. page 79"The Popes’ Rights & Wrongs", published by Truber & Co., 1860Dr. Angelo S. Rappaport, The Love Affairs of the Vatican, 1912 (See also Saeculum obscurum)
Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, again in 1045 and finally 1047–1048) was said to have conducted a very dissolute life during his papacy.Catholic Encyclopedia article on Benedict IX Accused by Bishop Benno of Piacenza of “many vile adulteries and murders.”“Post multa turpia adulteria et homicidia manibus suis perpetrata,
postremo, etc.” Template:CitationThe Book of Saints, by Ramsgate Benedictine Monks of St.Augustine’s Abbey, A.C. Black, 1989. ISBN 9780713653007 Pope Victor III referred in his third book of Dialogues to “his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts. His life as a Pope so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it.”“Cuius vita quam turpis, quam freda, quamque execranda extiterit, horresco referre.” Template:Citation It prompted St. Peter Damian to write an extended treatise against sex in general, and homosexuality in particular. In his Liber Gomorrhianus, St. Peter Damian recorded that Benedict “feasted on immorality” and that he was “a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest”, accusing Benedict IX of routine sodomy and bestiality and was said to have sponsored orgies.Liber Gomorrhianus, ISBN 8876945172 In May 1045, Benedict IX resigned his office to pursue marriage, selling his office for 1,500 pounds of gold to his godfather, the pious priest John Gratian, who named himself Pope Gregory VI.Dr. Angelo S. Rappaport, The Love Affairs of the Vatican, 1912, pp. 81-82.
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503) had a notably long affair with Vannozza dei Cattanei before his papacy, by whom he had his famous illegitimate children Cesare and Lucrezia. A later mistress, Giulia Farnese, was the sister of Alessandro Farnese, who later became Pope Paul III. Alexander fathered a total of at least seven, and possibly as many as ten illegitimate children.The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church: Rodrigo Borja (See also Banquet of Chestnuts)
V
vsedriver
Guest
T
twopekinguys
Guest
So myspace is now a valid resource?
Just because you have studied something for years, doesn’t mean you “learned” anything.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Absolutely correct.
Another big difference between the Holy Catholic Church, and mormons is that Catholics face up to our history. We don’t ignore it, hide it, white wash it, or rewrite it.
It is there for everyone, warts and all. Unfortunately. mormons cannot say the same thing.
Z
zaffiroborant
Guest
And you copied and pasted that from where?
F
Fatboys
Guest
Talk about the tea pot calling the kettle black. This was just the ones that were sexually active during this time. This is not to say those that murdered to gain power, who bought their way into power, etc. I am not judging the church on these men. But you on the other hand hold a double standard. It seems that all the traditions which you live by were not taught by early church fathers. For example, Original sin was not taught in the beginning. If this teaching was so important why wouldn’t it be taught through out the scriptures. Or the emmaculate conception of Mary. There is no support biblically for this, just a false logic in my view of why she was born without original sin. Mary was born without sin because she was a baby. Babies can not sin. Babies do not know much of anything when they are born let alone the laws of God. Sin is the deliberate disobedience of Gods laws. Now baby sins… Because of the fall of Adam, all of us are born into mortality. We are subject to death brought about by the fall. This was the consequence of Adams disobedience.
As for not hiding history, go to the Catholic Encyclipedia. They don't mention anything about the popes unfavorable history.
F
Fatboys
Guest
Sorry about the confusion. Twopekinguy wrote this and I did not get quotes around it. Growing up was told that Joseph Smith used the interpreters found with the Gold plates. When I got into apologetics many years ago is when I read that some believed that much of the Book of Mormon was translated through a seer stone. It was used as the same purpose as the other interpreters, but really no one knows exactly if it was used or not. Joseph Smith never said it was, but only those who had never saw how it was done and just speculated as to the process. Joseph Smith said that it was done through what is now called the Urim and Thummin, which were bibical interpreters.
If someone says they know, they are just guessing
F
Fatboys
Guest
It is the information on it. Read it. Did you want me to post something from a anti mormon website. It is the same thing. The biggest anti’s are Sandra and Jerald Tanner in SLC. The admitted that it was mostly grammatical errors or punctuation. Nothing seems to please you I fear.So myspace is now a valid resource?
Just because you have studied something for years, doesn’t mean you “learned” anything.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Nope, not using a double standard at all.
Like I said, we admit, and acknowledge our Church’s history. How is that a double standard?
At no point, did anyone ever say the men running the Holy Catholic Church were perfect. You’re grabbing at straws here.
Yes, the Church had it’s hand in some wrong things, but again, it is there for all to see, warts and all.
When did the mormon church admit to Mountain Meadows? Oh yeah, right, they didn’t. Even Brigham Young had the Cairn dismantled, and the cross removed, leaving very little left. How Christian of him.
You seem awfully hung up on the whole sex thing.
You realize the celibacy is a discipline, and not a dogma right? I know I’ve mentioned that earlier, so you might want to move onto a different obsession, or do you want to talk about all the “sex” stuff involved in mormonism? Like polygamy.I’ve already explained the others, and I really don’t need to repeat myself, it is there for you to read.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Try finding a legitimate source, then we’ll talk.
F
Fatboys
Guest
They have always admitted that members of the church who lived in that area did commit this unspeakable murder. Read a history about it from a unbiased writter.Nope, not using a double standard at all.
Like I said, we admit, and acknowledge our Church’s history. How is that a double standard?
At no point, did anyone ever say the men running the Holy Catholic Church were perfect. You’re grabbing at straws here.
Yes, the Church had it’s hand in some wrong things, but again, it is there for all to see, warts and all.
When did the mormon church admit to Mountain Meadows? Oh yeah, right, they didn’t. Even Brigham Young had the Cairn dismantled, and the cross removed, leaving very little left. How Christian of him.
You seem awfully hung up on the whole sex thing.
I’ve already explained the others, and I really don’t need to repeat myself, it is there for you to read.
Code:
I understand that celibacy is a disipline, but it was never taught in the early church and was only accepted to be a disipline long long after the much.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Harris’ description concurs with that of David Whitmer, another one of the three witnesses whose testimony appears at the front of the Book of Mormon. Whitmer details exactly how the stone produced the English interpretation. On page 12 of his book An Address to All Believers in Christ, Whitmer wrote,
Seems like a first hand account to me. Whitmer was/is considered a good witness to the BoM.
Who is wrong? Whitmer, who was there, or mormon leadership of today saying it is just speculation?
There are more, like his wife Emma
Robert N. Hullinger, in his book: Joseph Smith’s Response to Skepticism, cites a personal interview Emma Smith-Bidamon gave to a committee of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1879. He notes on pages 9-10: “Smith’s wife Emma supported Harris’s and Whitmer’s versions of the story in recalling that her husband buried his face in his hat while she was serving as his scribe.”
Code:
"I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man."Who is wrong? Whitmer, who was there, or mormon leadership of today saying it is just speculation?
There are more, like his wife Emma
Robert N. Hullinger, in his book: Joseph Smith’s Response to Skepticism, cites a personal interview Emma Smith-Bidamon gave to a committee of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1879. He notes on pages 9-10: “Smith’s wife Emma supported Harris’s and Whitmer’s versions of the story in recalling that her husband buried his face in his hat while she was serving as his scribe.”
Stephen168
New member
Christ and his Apostles were not married. Just the opposite of Joseph Smith and his ‘apostles.’
T
twopekinguys
Guest
But you aren’t getting the fact that a discipline is not a dogma. Dogma requires acceptance as an infallible teaching, discipline does not.
You realize there are married priests right? Look to the Eastern Rites, as well as the Anglican ordinates.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Following that logic, It is hard to think that God would lie, and abandon his church after he said he wouldn’t.
Stephen168
New member
Yet, Christ and most of his Apostles never multiplied.
S
SteveVH
Guest
What do you mean it was never taught in the early church?
“Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” (1 Cor 7:8-9)
Paul prefered celibacy for himself and those who accompanied him on his mission. He said they should marry “if they cannot control themselves”.
- Status