Catholicism v. Mormonism

[ZDHayden]

If you will, please participate in my experiment. I would like to, after reading a thread here in the Non-Catholic Religions forum, observe a debate between the sides. This is not permission to attack either side in an uncivil manner, so keep it polite, guys. This is simply a test to see which side knows their own and their opponent’s side better. Please follow these simple rules:

-If you make a statement, source it in the following formats, whichever is applicable:
Book: (source, page #)
Website:
NO videos
-If you make a claim, you MUST source it in one of the above methods. You CAN use logic to interpret the sources or to clarify their meaning.
-If you are Catholic, you CANNOT use the Catechism or Papal Encyclicals to support yourself.
-If you are Mormon, you CANNOT use the Book of Mormon to support yourself.
-Personal experience has NO place here. I don’t want to read a post that says how comfortable and “right” your respective religion feels. Keep it professional.
-You cannot state that either is not Christian, as by the dictionary definition of Christianity, both fulfill the requirements.
-If you are Catholic you CAN use the Book of Mormon to support yourself.
-If you are Mormon you CAN use the Catechism or Papal Encyclicals to support yourself.
-If anyone breaks the above rules, please DO NOT respond to their post.

Every day at 4 pm (excluding Friday, as I won’t have an internet connection then, I’ll substitute it with a double bonus on Saturday) I’ll post the point count-up. Any posts after 4pm EST is considered part of the next day’s point configuration. The debate will close on 19 May 2010, at 4 pm EST. The winner will be announced on the 20th of May from 4 pm EST to 6 pm EST. Here is how points are figured:

+1 for using the Bible.
+1 for using a historical document.
+2 for using a document pertaining to the opposite side.
-10 for breaking any of the rules laid forth above.
+2 for using secular documents.
-2 for changing the topic at hand.

If an individual on either side breaks any of the rules, they not only cause their side to lose 10 points, but also are disqualified from any further debate.

Furthermore, the points will be averaged so as to disallow any advantages to either side, this being a Catholic forum.

Any individual who is NEITHER Catholic nor Mormon may enter the debate, but MUST announce their side in their first post.

If you have any concerns or questions concerning my objectivity (I will not enter the debate, but will be a mediator), please use the following format so I do not mistake it as a piece of the debate:

::Comment or Question of Concern::

The topic of this debate is: the priesthood.

 

[Annie_B]

I really wish you luck on this one. However, since you are not a moderator at CA you will really have no control over who posts and what they post.
Annie

 

[zerinus]

If you will, please participate in my experiment. I would like to, after reading a thread here in the Non-Catholic Religions forum, observe a debate between the sides. This is not permission to attack either side in an uncivil manner, so keep it polite, guys. This is simply a test to see which side knows their own and their opponent’s side better. Please follow these simple rules:

-If you make a statement, source it in the following formats, whichever is applicable:
Book: (source, page #)
Website:
NO videos
-If you make a claim, you MUST source it in one of the above methods. You CAN use logic to interpret the sources or to clarify their meaning.
-If you are Catholic, you CANNOT use the Catechism or Papal Encyclicals to support yourself.
-If you are Mormon, you CANNOT use the Book of Mormon to support yourself.
-Personal experience has NO place here. I don’t want to read a post that says how comfortable and “right” your respective religion feels. Keep it professional.
-You cannot state that either is not Christian, as by the dictionary definition of Christianity, both fulfill the requirements.
-If you are Catholic you CAN use the Book of Mormon to support yourself.
-If you are Mormon you CAN use the Catechism or Papal Encyclicals to support yourself.
-If anyone breaks the above rules, please DO NOT respond to their post.

Every day at 4 pm (excluding Friday, as I won’t have an internet connection then, I’ll substitute it with a double bonus on Saturday) I’ll post the point count-up. Any posts after 4pm EST is considered part of the next day’s point configuration. The debate will close on 19 May 2010, at 4 pm EST. The winner will be announced on the 20th of May from 4 pm EST to 6 pm EST. Here is how points are figured:

+1 for using the Bible.
+1 for using a historical document.
+2 for using a document pertaining to the opposite side.
-10 for breaking any of the rules laid forth above.
+2 for using secular documents.
-2 for changing the topic at hand.

If an individual on either side breaks any of the rules, they not only cause their side to lose 10 points, but also are disqualified from any further debate.

Furthermore, the points will be averaged so as to disallow any advantages to either side, this being a Catholic forum.

Any individual who is NEITHER Catholic nor Mormon may enter the debate, but MUST announce their side in their first post.

If you have any concerns or questions concerning my objectivity (I will not enter the debate, but will be a mediator), please use the following format so I do not mistake it as a piece of the debate:

::Comment or Question of Concern::

The topic of this debate is: the priesthood.

You are starting this thread on the wrong note. The rules of engagement are determined by the board administration, not by the you. If you want to debate, you debate within those rules; you don’t start off by laying down rules.

 

[RoryMcKenzie56]

I don’t see why someone interested in a reasonable, well-documented discussion cannot propose his own criteria for how he would determine who was better at defending their own point of view. Are we here to be persuausive or merely see our words on the internet? If this is what the original poster likes, why would we refuse it to him on the grounds that he doesn’t set the rules. He is not failing to recognize what the board allows, but he is informing us what we might do to obtain some merit for our positions in his eyes. He then politely asks us, “if we will”, to participate in the experiment. If anybody doesn’t like it they are free to not participate.

I do have a question though. It seems probable, given the format, that both sides will, in the eyes of the other, misuse the source documents, catechism, encyclicals, or Book of Mormon. Are we allowed to make corrections to any perceived misinterpretations once the other party quotes from one of our own sources?

 

[Roy5]

I am not a Mormon and find much of the doctrine espoused by the LDS quite far out. This is not to be critical of the Mormon people, who seem to be a fine, upstanding moral group.

 What has impressed me, however, are the ways in which Catholicism and Mormonism parallel on another. Here are a three examples that come to mind immediately.

 Both have a strong central hierarchy, one located in Rome, the other in Salt Lake City. 

 The head of this hierarchy seems to be infallible when he declares doctrines. For example, for 100 years and longer Blacks were denied the priesthood, and since all male Mormons tend to attain that status this was severe discrimination. As I recall a black skin was supposed to be a punishment - just for what I don't recall. When, in the 1970s, some colleges threatened not to play BYU, the Mormon Tabernacle Choir was coming under fire, etc., the president of the Church announced a new revelation. Blacks suddenly were equal!

 Women play a subordinate role in Mormonism. As in Catholicism, they cannot become priests. 

 I'm sure there are other parallels, but those three are the ones that immediately come to mind. 

 Let me say, again, lest I be reprimanded for criticizing another religion (which is done all the time here on CAF), Mormons are fine folks. While not Protestants, they have some of the ethics of old-time Protestantism - no smoking, no alcohol. Joseph Smith also received a revelation that they should not consume hot drinks (tea, coffee), and that he could take several wives. Just how many he had is an issue for some debate. Ditto for Brigham Young. It must have been about 1890 that the president received a revelation that polygamy was no longer okay. The US required that before Utah would be permitted to enter the union.

 

[ZDHayden]

I don’t see why someone interested in a reasonable, well-documented discussion cannot propose his own criteria for how he would determine who was better at defending their own point of view. Are we here to be persuausive or merely see our words on the internet? If this is what the original poster likes, why would we refuse it to him on the grounds that he doesn’t set the rules. He is not failing to recognize what the board allows, but he is informing us what we might do to obtain some merit for our positions in his eyes. He then politely asks us, “if we will”, to participate in the experiment. If anybody doesn’t like it they are free to not participate.

I do have a question though. It seems probable, given the format, that both sides will, in the eyes of the other, misuse the source documents, catechism, encyclicals, or Book of Mormon. Are we allowed to make corrections to any perceived misinterpretations once the other party quotes from one of our own sources?

Yes, you would be permitted to correct misinterpretations.

 

[ZDHayden]

I am not a Mormon and find much of the doctrine espoused by the LDS quite far out. This is not to be critical of the Mormon people, who seem to be a fine, upstanding moral group.

 What has impressed me, however, are the ways in which Catholicism and Mormonism parallel on another. Here are a three examples that come to mind immediately.

 Both have a strong central hierarchy, one located in Rome, the other in Salt Lake City. 

 The head of this hierarchy seems to be infallible when he declares doctrines. For example, for 100 years and longer Blacks were denied the priesthood, and since all male Mormons tend to attain that status this was severe discrimination. As I recall a black skin was supposed to be a punishment - just for what I don't recall. When, in the 1970s, some colleges threatened not to play BYU, the Mormon Tabernacle Choir was coming under fire, etc., the president of the Church announced a new revelation. Blacks suddenly were equal!

 Women play a subordinate role in Mormonism. As in Catholicism, they cannot become priests. 

 I'm sure there are other parallels, but those three are the ones that immediately come to mind. 

 Let me say, again, lest I be reprimanded for criticizing another religion (which is done all the time here on CAF), Mormons are fine folks. While not Protestants, they have some of the ethics of old-time Protestantism - no smoking, no alcohol. Joseph Smith also received a revelation that they should not consume hot drinks (tea, coffee), and that he could take several wives. Just how many he had is an issue for some debate. Ditto for Brigham Young. It must have been about 1890 that the president received a revelation that polygamy was no longer okay. The US required that before Utah would be permitted to enter the union.

Indeed, I have many Mormon friends, and am not trying to disprove or disrespect them in any way. I simply would like to see how the two sides would, in a formal academic manner, defend their faith without resorting to insult or demean the other. This also forces both sides to become familiar with the other in order to better make their argument. Have a nice day.

 

[dianaiad]

If you will, please participate in my experiment. I would like to, after reading a thread here in the Non-Catholic Religions forum, observe a debate between the sides. This is not permission to attack either side in an uncivil manner, so keep it polite, guys. This is simply a test to see which side knows their own and their opponent’s side better. Please follow these simple rules:

-If you make a statement, source it in the following formats, whichever is applicable:
Book: (source, page #)
Website:
NO videos
-If you make a claim, you MUST source it in one of the above methods. You CAN use logic to interpret the sources or to clarify their meaning.
-If you are Catholic, you CANNOT use the Catechism or Papal Encyclicals to support yourself.
-If you are Mormon, you CANNOT use the Book of Mormon to support yourself.
-Personal experience has NO place here. I don’t want to read a post that says how comfortable and “right” your respective religion feels. Keep it professional.
-You cannot state that either is not Christian, as by the dictionary definition of Christianity, both fulfill the requirements.
-If you are Catholic you CAN use the Book of Mormon to support yourself.
-If you are Mormon you CAN use the Catechism or Papal Encyclicals to support yourself.
-If anyone breaks the above rules, please DO NOT respond to their post.

Every day at 4 pm (excluding Friday, as I won’t have an internet connection then, I’ll substitute it with a double bonus on Saturday) I’ll post the point count-up. Any posts after 4pm EST is considered part of the next day’s point configuration. The debate will close on 19 May 2010, at 4 pm EST. The winner will be announced on the 20th of May from 4 pm EST to 6 pm EST. Here is how points are figured:

+1 for using the Bible.
+1 for using a historical document.
+2 for using a document pertaining to the opposite side.
-10 for breaking any of the rules laid forth above.
+2 for using secular documents.
-2 for changing the topic at hand.

If an individual on either side breaks any of the rules, they not only cause their side to lose 10 points, but also are disqualified from any further debate.

Furthermore, the points will be averaged so as to disallow any advantages to either side, this being a Catholic forum.

Any individual who is NEITHER Catholic nor Mormon may enter the debate, but MUST announce their side in their first post.

If you have any concerns or questions concerning my objectivity (I will not enter the debate, but will be a mediator), please use the following format so I do not mistake it as a piece of the debate:

::Comment or Question of Concern::

The topic of this debate is: the priesthood.

I don’t understand the part about Mormons not being able to use the Book of Mormon, and Catholics not being able to use the Catechism, but that each may use the OTHER side’s literature/scriptures/Sacred Tradition. This seems to me to be a set up for precisely the sort of antagonistic and adversarial debate you claim you do not want.

After all, how can a Catholic, who doesn’t believe that the Book of Mormon is scripture, possibly support his OWN position by quoting from it? It would be like trying to support Chomskey’s idea of innate language aquisition by looking only at behaviorist literature…or attempting to prove the Big Bang Theory by quoting from Alice in Wonderland.

The only way your prohibition works is if what you REALLY want is a free for all: Catholics can make fun of, and ridicule, the Book of Mormon whereas you have tied the hands of the Mormons so that they cannot defend it. The reverse is also true; the way you have set this up, Mormons can attack and ridicule Papal Encyclicals and the catechism, but Catholics cannot use them to defend themselves.

A very bad idea all around.

If you are serious…and you want to keep track of the points, then I suggest a modification. Both Catholics and Mormons can use sources THEY accept to support what their beliefs ARE, but both are restricted to commonly held and believed in sources to attempt to prove their truth.

Example: a Catholic can use the catechism or anything else to explain why they believe that abortion is a major sin that results in instant excommunication, but he would have to support that claim from the bible.

The problem is, sir, that no Mormon knows as much about a Catholic’s belief as that Catholic, and it doesn’t matter what anybody thinks ‘the church teaches.’ We believe what we believe, and we are the sole experts on our own beliefs. If a Mormon claims that ‘Catholics believe’ this or that, and any Catholic contradicts that, the Catholic wins. The same holds true when a Catholic makes a claim about Mormonism.

So…unless what you really want is a wholesale mutual Catholic/Mormon bashing session, you might want to think about revising those rules.

"M jest sayin, is all…

 

[ZDHayden]

I don’t understand the part about Mormons not being able to use the Book of Mormon, and Catholics not being able to use the Catechism, but that each may use the OTHER side’s literature/scriptures/Sacred Tradition. This seems to me to be a set up for precisely the sort of antagonistic and adversarial debate you claim you do not want.

After all, how can a Catholic, who doesn’t believe that the Book of Mormon is scripture, possibly support his OWN position by quoting from it? It would be like trying to support Chomskey’s idea of innate language aquisition by looking only at behaviorist literature…or attempting to prove the Big Bang Theory by quoting from Alice in Wonderland.

The only way your prohibition works is if what you REALLY want is a free for all: Catholics can make fun of, and ridicule, the Book of Mormon whereas you have tied the hands of the Mormons so that they cannot defend it. The reverse is also true; the way you have set this up, Mormons can attack and ridicule Papal Encyclicals and the catechism, but Catholics cannot use them to defend themselves.

A very bad idea all around.

If you are serious…and you want to keep track of the points, then I suggest a modification. Both Catholics and Mormons can use sources THEY accept to support what their beliefs ARE, but both are restricted to commonly held and believed in sources to attempt to prove their truth.

Example: a Catholic can use the catechism or anything else to explain why they believe that abortion is a major sin that results in instant excommunication, but he would have to support that claim from the bible.

The problem is, sir, that no Mormon knows as much about a Catholic’s belief as that Catholic, and it doesn’t matter what anybody thinks ‘the church teaches.’ We believe what we believe, and we are the sole experts on our own beliefs. If a Mormon claims that ‘Catholics believe’ this or that, and any Catholic contradicts that, the Catholic wins. The same holds true when a Catholic makes a claim about Mormonism.

So…unless what you really want is a wholesale mutual Catholic/Mormon bashing session, you might want to think about revising those rules.

"M jest sayin, is all…

Thank you for your suggestions. I had not considered such an outcome. But your suggestion makes sense.
The above quote describes the new regulations concerning sources. I.e, the sources of each can be used by their respective believers, but if they are used they MUST be supported by the Bible.