Dealing charitably with LDS

[PaulDupre1]

By the time I decided to weigh in on the “evangelization style” debate on the Cumorah thread, the thread was closed.

I thought long and hard about how to share my thoughts on this weighty topic. All I can do is to share my personal experience:

When I was LDS in the 1970s and 1980s, I was absolutely sure that we LDS had the TRUTH and no one else had it. I was sure (because it was constantly reinforced in LDS meetings and publications) that the LDS truth claims were biblical, backed by archeology and history and unassailable by any argument by “gentiles” (non-Mormons).

In 1978, in the middle of my mission in Taiwan, I knocked on the door of a certain Mrs. Chang, a convert to the Catholic faith. I tried to present the LDS missionary lessons to her, but she kept (very politely) stopping me and pointing to bible passages that contradicted the doctrines I was trying to present. It was very frustrating. After about an hour of this, my companion and I left and shook the dust from our feet as a testimony against her.

Five years later, when working at my first real computer programming job, I was approached by a co-worker named Kevin who asked me if I was saved. I didn’t know quite how to respond, but informed him that I was LDS, and therefore in possession of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and that if he wanted to know more, I would happily tell him about it.

The man proceeded to vivisect me doctrinally. He challenged every Mormon tenet and showed me where in the bible it was disproved. I tried several times to disengage but he followed me and peppered me with questions I could not answer or had never thought of. He was so “in my face” that I felt violated and angry. This SOB could not shut me down like that and get away with it. I determined to go home, look up the passages he cited and bring back answers that would have me baptizing him within the month. I was sure I had THE TRUTH.

But when I tried to find rebuttals to the bible passages Kevin cited (which we never studied in LDS Sunday School), I came up empty. There was no rebuttal except “because Joseph Smith said so”. A few days later at work, Kevin approached me and apologized for being so rough on me, but said “sometimes you have to wound people so that they can be healed”. He asked if I had researched the topics we talked about. I admitted that I had tried, but had no ready answers. “That’s okay”, he smiled. “Just keep on searching and questioning”.

I did. I got every LDS book I could get my hands on, including the “History of the Church”, and the entire set of the “Journal of Discourses”, which was way more that I could afford on my salary at the time. I read for hours - The LDS Scriptures, the History of the Church and the JoD- often long into the night. My wife (a 6th-generation Mormon), concerned for my state of mind, joined in my studies (God bless her). I told her about the lovely Mrs. Chang and that SOB Kevin who had upset me so. The more we read, the more appalled we were. Together, over 2 years, we studied our way out of the LDS Church.

Had it not been for the gentle Mrs. Chang, and the confrontational Kevin, I would never have started looking at the objective truth claims of the LDS. I think Mrs. Chang planted the seeds, but the “in your face” Kevin plucked up the tares.

Fourteen years later, after getting over my trust issues with religion, the memory of the gentle Mrs. Chang ( and a few Catholic relatives) helped point me toward the Catholic faith. But without Kevin and his “in your face” apologetics, I would never have questioned nor left the LDS. Thank God for you, Kevin, and for you Mrs. Chang.

I guess what I’m saying is that it takes all kinds of apologists to reach all kinds of people. If everyone I met were as kind-hearted as Mrs. Chang, all we would get is seeds. If everyone were as confrontational as Kevin, all we would get is torn-up fields.

Everyone, keep doing what you are doing, and may God bless you all.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[andrewstx]

Not to be uncharitable, but I find it difficult to extend charity to Mormons whose first principle is to is to claim that the Catholic Church is “totally apostate” and the “church of Satan”. I just get a strong feeling that most of the Mormons are here to proselyise and not so much to discuss.

I also wonder if the recent lack of participation from LDS members is due to an order from on high, Mormon headquarters?

 

[PaulDupre1]

Not to be uncharitable, but I find it difficult to extend charity to Mormons whose first principle is to is to claim that the Catholic Church is “totally apostate” and the “church of Satan”. I just get a strong feeling that most of the Mormons are here to proselyise and not so much to discuss.

I also wonder if the recent lack of participation from LDS members is due to an order from on high, Mormon headquarters?

That’s why we need Kevin (and Texas Knight).

 

[andrewstx]

That’s why we need Kevin (and Texas Knight).

Exactly. I hope that Texan Knight has not been banned. We have much in common besides being from Texas.

I was a Mormon too, and also had a hard time escaping “the church”.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Perhaps one of the few posters with my unique perspective (posting here as a believing LDS and now reverting back to Catholicism soon, after much prayer, reading, thinking, going back and forth, etc), allow me to share some thoughts.

Not to be uncharitable, but I find it difficult to extend charity to Mormons whose first principle is to is to claim that the Catholic Church is “totally apostate” and the “church of Satan”. I just get a strong feeling that most of the Mormons are here to proselyise and not so much to discuss.

Well at least for me personally, when I started posting here as a believing LDS, I was most certainly not here to proselytize. I was here to discuss, especially to correct misunderstandings about LDS teachings. I also was/am interested in threads not about Catholicism or Mormonism. I personally have a strong feeling that most of the Mormons on this forum are here for that reason.

As far as Catholicism being the “church of Satan” and “totally apostate”, I’d say that most LDS today don’t believe such things, if we even allow that Catholicism enters their thoughts. I’d say that many LDS, especially my fellow YSAs (young single adults), would see Catholics as fellow Christians, brothers and sisters in Christ (without of course compromising the LDS view of their church being the “one true church”). Heck, one of my LDS friends that is very faithful (and is Young Men President) went with me to the local Catholic cathedral last week, sat with me before the exposed Eucharist (I explained the Catholic view on the Real Presence, as well as Eucharistic Adoration), and even eek knelt in prayer, and subsequently lit a candle, after he saw me do so and asked about that. So my point is, while I’m sure there are LDS that believe that the Catholic Church is the church of Satan, whore of Babylon, etc (as I’m sure there are Protestants that believe the same), it isn’t a “first principle”, and LDS these days seem to be more about emphasizing how they are Christians just like Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, and want to emphasize their brother/sister-hood.

I also wonder if the recent lack of participation from LDS members is due to an order from on high, Mormon headquarters?

That made me laugh a little.

No. If anything, the LDS Church recently had a broadcast that emphasized the use of the internet in reaching others with the restored gospel. See this for more info:

lds.org/church/news/members-and-missionaries-to-partner-in-work-of-salvation?lang=eng

As I stated in the Cumorah thread, I strongly believe that the LDS posters simply won’t respond to threads and posts made by certain people that are especially uncharitable and divisive (and I make a distinction between that and being confrontational or wanting to debate). I did the same thing when I was a believing LDS posting here. I would (and still) only respond to those that were charitable, seemed interested in dialoguing, sharing our beliefs, and even debating our differences and the bases for them, in a charitable, calm manner. On the other hand, if someone was saying things like “your jesus is weak, cruel, and a liar”, or “the mormon god”, “smithism”, or referring to Joseph Smith as “old joe”, “joe”, “joey”, etc, then I most definitely would not be responding to that individual.

So, I agree completely with what SteveVH stated in the other thread. I also agree with what PaulDupre1 said in this thread, and believe that there are different approaches to reaching people. What I don’t agree with is uncharitable, divisive behavior (which I’m sure I’ve been guilty of many a time, Lord forgive me), and I certainly wasn’t moved to reconsider Catholicism by people that acted in that manner. If anything, the posters that really helped me reconsider Catholicism were those that were substantive in their posts, talked about the issues complete with Biblical and patristic support, and not just saying things like “joe was a liar and a charlatan”, or “the mormon church is obviously false”, or “this is all just a waste of time since joey was obviously a false prophet” (all things I’ve seen). I’d name names but I don’t want to leave anyone out (cough SteveVH, xixxvmcm85, RebeccaJ, reading Soren1’s old posts (SO glad I discovered those), 3DOP over at Mormon Dialogue and Discussion Board).

Anyway, just my two cents.

 

[Et_Cetera]

Tell them you’ve taken too much LSD to talk.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

Not to be uncharitable, but I find it difficult to extend charity to Mormons whose first principle is to is to claim that the Catholic Church is “totally apostate” and the “church of Satan”. I just get a strong feeling that most of the Mormons are here to proselyise and not so much to discuss.

I also wonder if the recent lack of participation from LDS members is due to an order from on high, Mormon headquarters?

I formed a friendship with 2 American Mormons who knocked on our door a couple of years ago and they never mentioned that the CC is the church of Satan.

They were lovely, well-mannered and well-spoken lads.

 

[Pilosopo]

Perhaps one of the few posters with my unique perspective (posting here as a believing LDS and now reverting back to Catholicism soon, after much prayer, reading, thinking, going back and forth, etc), allow me to share some thoughts.

Well at least for me personally, when I started posting here as a believing LDS, I was most certainly not here to proselytize. I was here to discuss, especially to correct misunderstandings about LDS teachings. I also was/am interested in threads not about Catholicism or Mormonism. I personally have a strong feeling that most of the Mormons on this forum are here for that reason.

As far as Catholicism being the “church of Satan” and “totally apostate”, I’d say that most LDS today don’t believe such things, if we even allow that Catholicism enters their thoughts. I’d say that many LDS, especially my fellow YSAs (young single adults), would see Catholics as fellow Christians, brothers and sisters in Christ (without of course compromising the LDS view of their church being the “one true church”). Heck, one of my LDS friends that is very faithful (and is Young Men President) went with me to the local Catholic cathedral last week, sat with me before the exposed Eucharist (I explained the Catholic view on the Real Presence, as well as Eucharistic Adoration), and even eek knelt in prayer, and subsequently lit a candle, after he saw me do so and asked about that. So my point is, while I’m sure there are LDS that believe that the Catholic Church is the church of Satan, whore of Babylon, etc (as I’m sure there are Protestants that believe the same), it isn’t a “first principle”, and LDS these days seem to be more about emphasizing how they are Christians just like Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, and want to emphasize their brother/sister-hood.

That made me laugh a little.

No. If anything, the LDS Church recently had a broadcast that emphasized the use of the internet in reaching others with the restored gospel. See this for more info:

lds.org/church/news/members-and-missionaries-to-partner-in-work-of-salvation?lang=eng

As I stated in the Cumorah thread, I strongly believe that the LDS posters simply won’t respond to threads and posts made by certain people that are especially uncharitable and divisive (and I make a distinction between that and being confrontational or wanting to debate). I did the same thing when I was a believing LDS posting here. I would (and still) only respond to those that were charitable, seemed interested in dialoguing, sharing our beliefs, and even debating our differences and the bases for them, in a charitable, calm manner. On the other hand, if someone was saying things like “your jesus is weak, cruel, and a liar”, or “the mormon god”, “smithism”, or referring to Joseph Smith as “old joe”, “joe”, “joey”, etc, then I most definitely would not be responding to that individual.

So, I agree completely with what SteveVH stated in the other thread. I also agree with what PaulDupre1 said in this thread, and believe that there are different approaches to reaching people. What I don’t agree with is uncharitable, divisive behavior (which I’m sure I’ve been guilty of many a time, Lord forgive me), and I certainly wasn’t moved to reconsider Catholicism by people that acted in that manner. If anything, the posters that really helped me reconsider Catholicism were those that were substantive in their posts, talked about the issues complete with Biblical and patristic support, and not just saying things like “joe was a liar and a charlatan”, or “the mormon church is obviously false”, or “this is all just a waste of time since joey was obviously a false prophet” (all things I’ve seen). I’d name names but I don’t want to leave anyone out (cough SteveVH, xixxvmcm85, RebeccaJ, reading Soren1’s old posts (SO glad I discovered those), 3DOP over at Mormon Dialogue and Discussion Board).

Anyway, just my two cents.

Thank you, LivingWaters7.
I happen to work with sheltering people who are homeless, which involves a consortium of local churches that have teamed up together-- Catholics, Mormons, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Evangelicals…
I kind of always look forward to when a Mormon family prepares meals, because they are quite generous when it goes to preparing quality and delicious meals to the people at the shelter.
With what I’ve learned and seen from practicing LDS members, family cohesion, zeal in a down-to-earth ministry, is all truly admirable.
That’s their life…
Going to their teachings … there may be disagreement here and there, there may be a lot of misunderstanding. In any case, let’s keep the dialogue going, and strive to steer clear from labeling.
In the end, where I see kindness, generosity and devotion to a neighbor, that speaks loads – gold really, not two cents – of God’s presence. I’ll join them anytime.

 

[RebeccaJ]

There is also the fact that this is a Catholic forum and most who read it are Catholic. I’m more concerned, like TK, with providing truth. LDS posters have demonstrated repeatedly that they are unable or unwilling to be entirely truthful in their posts re: Mormonism. Depending on the poster, some do this on purpose (milk before meat), others because they don’t know the truth themselves.

How many former LDS here were shielded from the entire truth of Mormon history, practice and belief?

What keeps me from posting lately, is that every LDS thread ends up a bag on TexasKnight. Seriously, is a waste of time, is against forum rules, and is not charitable towards him. If TK is breaking the rules, Eric will take care of it. So report him and stop talking about him ad nauseum.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Perhaps one of the few posters with my unique perspective (posting here as a believing LDS and now reverting back to Catholicism soon, after much prayer, reading, thinking, going back and forth, etc), allow me to share some thoughts.

Well at least for me personally, when I started posting here as a believing LDS, I was most certainly not here to proselytize. I was here to discuss, especially to correct misunderstandings about LDS teachings. I also was/am interested in threads not about Catholicism or Mormonism. I personally have a strong feeling that most of the Mormons on this forum are here for that reason.

As far as Catholicism being the “church of Satan” and “totally apostate”, I’d say that most LDS today don’t believe such things, if we even allow that Catholicism enters their thoughts. I’d say that many LDS, especially my fellow YSAs (young single adults), would see Catholics as fellow Christians, brothers and sisters in Christ (without of course compromising the LDS view of their church being the “one true church”). Heck, one of my LDS friends that is very faithful (and is Young Men President) went with me to the local Catholic cathedral last week, sat with me before the exposed Eucharist (I explained the Catholic view on the Real Presence, as well as Eucharistic Adoration), and even eek knelt in prayer, and subsequently lit a candle, after he saw me do so and asked about that. So my point is, while I’m sure there are LDS that believe that the Catholic Church is the church of Satan, whore of Babylon, etc (as I’m sure there are Protestants that believe the same), it isn’t a “first principle”, and LDS these days seem to be more about emphasizing how they are Christians just like Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, and want to emphasize their brother/sister-hood.

That made me laugh a little.

No. If anything, the LDS Church recently had a broadcast that emphasized the use of the internet in reaching others with the restored gospel. See this for more info:

lds.org/church/news/members-and-missionaries-to-partner-in-work-of-salvation?lang=eng

As I stated in the Cumorah thread, I strongly believe that the LDS posters simply won’t respond to threads and posts made by certain people that are especially uncharitable and divisive (and I make a distinction between that and being confrontational or wanting to debate). I did the same thing when I was a believing LDS posting here. I would (and still) only respond to those that were charitable, seemed interested in dialoguing, sharing our beliefs, and even debating our differences and the bases for them, in a charitable, calm manner. On the other hand, if someone was saying things like “your jesus is weak, cruel, and a liar”, or “the mormon god”, “smithism”, or referring to Joseph Smith as “old joe”, “joe”, “joey”, etc, then I most definitely would not be responding to that individual.

So, I agree completely with what SteveVH stated in the other thread. I also agree with what PaulDupre1 said in this thread, and believe that there are different approaches to reaching people. What I don’t agree with is uncharitable, divisive behavior (which I’m sure I’ve been guilty of many a time, Lord forgive me), and I certainly wasn’t moved to reconsider Catholicism by people that acted in that manner. If anything, the posters that really helped me reconsider Catholicism were those that were substantive in their posts, talked about the issues complete with Biblical and patristic support, and not just saying things like “joe was a liar and a charlatan”, or “the mormon church is obviously false”, or “this is all just a waste of time since joey was obviously a false prophet” (all things I’ve seen). I’d name names but I don’t want to leave anyone out (cough SteveVH, xixxvmcm85, RebeccaJ, reading Soren1’s old posts (SO glad I discovered those), 3DOP over at Mormon Dialogue and Discussion Board).

Anyway, just my two cents.

Glad to hear you’ve come to your senses. Thanks be to God.

Re: the whore of Babylon and all that. You’re living the PC version of Mormonism, back in the day, I was taught in Sunday school and seminary that the Roman Catholic Church was the devil’s own, a whore, the wholesale corrupter of truth, and the greatest evidence of the great apostasy.

The Mormon church changes, as it needs, to attract converts and retain members. Whatever teaching needs to be changed to achieve this goal, is changed. Since the Mormon church targets Catholics, and can’t very well introduce itself as the counter to the whore, it now wants to present itself as just another Christian religion. “We’re not as weird as people say we are.” Yeah, it is.

 

[Boulder257]

Completely agree that we can spread truth without being direspectful. I know of the posts you speak where people refer to “joe” or “old joe.” They do not promote a healthy dialogue but are drenched in sarcasm. Not a charitable way to discourse. I hope that we can refrain from such things and keep to a calm and respectful demeanor.

 

[superwimp]

Hello,
To continue on with Pauls original thread with regards to how to treat Mormons. I was excommunicated a long time ago before the internet. It was during the Jesus movement of the 70's. I would go to LDS church plus various bible studies and meetings of various other groups. They knew I was Mormon but none of them bothered me with any anti stuff. I was able to learn at my own pace eventually leaving the LDS and joining the temple lot group.

 

[TexanKnight]

Hello,

 To continue on with Pauls original thread with regards to how to treat Mormons.  I was excommunicated a long time ago before the internet.  It was during the Jesus movement of the 70's.  I would go to LDS church plus various bible studies and meetings of various other groups.  They knew I was Mormon but none of them bothered me with any anti stuff.  I was able to learn at my own pace eventually leaving the LDS and joining the temple lot group.

As a Mormon, I dealt with quite a bit of anti sentiment. But, it was not until a visit to palmyra during the pageant that I was faced with “in-your-face” anti. That approach caused me to to study to be a better lds apologist. It was that study that caused me to leave the lds church. The in’your-face anti did more for me that that soft anti because it angered me and made me want to study.

Now, I do not consider an anti…and I certainly do not say the things on this board that the antis said to me…some was pretty awful. Nor have I acted like I have been treated on LDS boards (I no longer go to LDS boards) or even as I have been treated on here by Mormons (who have called me a liar and made personal attacks against my profession etc) or even as some Catholics have done here.

But its all good. I am here to be truthful and shine the light on a very dangerous religion. I look at our Church Fathers and Saints and I see that there have been some like those who are more peaceful, I have seen some that are very “put on the armor of God” and vocal and unmoving. I agree that there is a place for both types.

 

[KathleenGee]

I was burned seeing former LDS people come on here, and not honestly face questions or cover up the anti-Catholic past and the LDS practice of anti-Catholic rituals done in their temples or wards.

I was very thankful for former Mormons finding sources that verified my experience when I saw such literature in a Deseret bookstore next to the most affluent area here in town. It was a contradiction to the educational level of the surrounding population.

When I went back to the LDS store two weeks later to look at the book again and be sure of the title and author, after reporting this to the LDS in Salt Lake City, the book was pulled.

But yes, I agree very much with Paul here that Livingwaters is in the new PC Mormon community that is not going to reveal its past teachings.

Good news is that Mormonism is standardizing and we pray for their conversion to Christianity.

 

[twopekinguys]

There is also the fact that this is a Catholic forum and most who read it are Catholic. I’m more concerned, like TK, with providing truth. LDS posters have demonstrated repeatedly that they are unable or unwilling to be entirely truthful in their posts re: Mormonism. Depending on the poster, some do this on purpose (milk before meat), others because they don’t know the truth themselves.

How many former LDS here were shielded from the entire truth of Mormon history, practice and belief?

What keeps me from posting lately, is that every LDS thread ends up a bag on TexasKnight. Seriously, is a waste of time, is against forum rules, and is not charitable towards him. If TK is breaking the rules, Eric will take care of it. So report him and stop talking about him ad nauseum.

Bingo!!!

We have a winner!!!

Paul, and LW have both indicated something that I have seen over and over. When confronted with things about mormonism, they ended up studying their way out.

It seems to be the common denominator for many who leave it.

In addition, I echo your comments about TK. I’ve told posters on other threads the same thing. They aren’t board nannies or monitors. Put him on ignore, or report him, and let the chips fall where they may.

Like it or not, sometimes it takes an in your face moment or two to get you on the right path.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

Theres only so much charity one can give though.

 

[SteveVH]

Truth and charity do not have to be opposed. The best posts I have found on any Mormon thread are those from Soren1. He simply presents a well thought out, in my opinion, irrefutable argument, with absolutely no personal remarks or snarky comments. He acknowledges the Mormon position as the Mormon position without being rude or crass and then demolishes it with truth. That is affective apologetics.

So the idea that being charitable results in a weak, watered down version of the truth is simply a fallacy. We should never proclaim the truth without charity and understand that charity without truth is no charity at all. We need both. They compliment, rather than oppose each other.

 

[CarolNoel]

By the time I decided to weigh in on the “evangelization style” debate on the Cumorah thread, the thread was closed.

I thought long and hard about how to share my thoughts on this weighty topic. All I can do is to share my personal experience:

When I was LDS in the 1970s and 1980s, I was absolutely sure that we LDS had the TRUTH and no one else had it. I was sure (because it was constantly reinforced in LDS meetings and publications) that the LDS truth claims were biblical, backed by archeology and history and unassailable by any argument by “gentiles” (non-Mormons).

In 1978, in the middle of my mission in Taiwan, I knocked on the door of a certain Mrs. Chang, a convert to the Catholic faith. I tried to present the LDS missionary lessons to her, but she kept (very politely) stopping me and pointing to bible passages that contradicted the doctrines I was trying to present. It was very frustrating. After about an hour of this, my companion and I left and shook the dust from our feet as a testimony against her.

Five years later, when working at my first real computer programming job, I was approached by a co-worker named Kevin who asked me if I was saved. I didn’t know quite how to respond, but informed him that I was LDS, and therefore in possession of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and that if he wanted to know more, I would happily tell him about it.

The man proceeded to vivisect me doctrinally. He challenged every Mormon tenet and showed me where in the bible it was disproved. I tried several times to disengage but he followed me and peppered me with questions I could not answer or had never thought of. He was so “in my face” that I felt violated and angry. This SOB could not shut me down like that and get away with it. I determined to go home, look up the passages he cited and bring back answers that would have me baptizing him within the month. I was sure I had THE TRUTH.

But when I tried to find rebuttals to the bible passages Kevin cited (which we never studied in LDS Sunday School), I came up empty. There was no rebuttal except “because Joseph Smith said so”. A few days later at work, Kevin approached me and apologized for being so rough on me, but said “sometimes you have to wound people so that they can be healed”. He asked if I had researched the topics we talked about. I admitted that I had tried, but had no ready answers. “That’s okay”, he smiled. “Just keep on searching and questioning”.

I did. I got every LDS book I could get my hands on, including the “History of the Church”, and the entire set of the “Journal of Discourses”, which was way more that I could afford on my salary at the time. I read for hours - The LDS Scriptures, the History of the Church and the JoD- often long into the night. My wife (a 6th-generation Mormon), concerned for my state of mind, joined in my studies (God bless her). I told her about the lovely Mrs. Chang and that SOB Kevin who had upset me so. The more we read, the more appalled we were. Together, over 2 years, we studied our way out of the LDS Church.

Had it not been for the gentle Mrs. Chang, and the confrontational Kevin, I would never have started looking at the objective truth claims of the LDS. I think Mrs. Chang planted the seeds, but the “in your face” Kevin plucked up the tares.

Fourteen years later, after getting over my trust issues with religion, the memory of the gentle Mrs. Chang ( and a few Catholic relatives) helped point me toward the Catholic faith. But without Kevin and his “in your face” apologetics, I would never have questioned nor left the LDS. Thank God for you, Kevin, and for you Mrs. Chang.

I guess what I’m saying is that it takes all kinds of apologists to reach all kinds of people. If everyone I met were as kind-hearted as Mrs. Chang, all we would get is seeds. If everyone were as confrontational as Kevin, all we would get is torn-up fields.

Everyone, keep doing what you are doing, and may God bless you all.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

Thanks so much Paul for your excellent post…

 

[Jaysuitical]

By the time I decided to weigh in on the “evangelization style” debate on the Cumorah thread, the thread was closed.

I thought long and hard about how to share my thoughts on this weighty topic. All I can do is to share my personal experience:

When I was LDS in the 1970s and 1980s, I was absolutely sure that we LDS had the TRUTH and no one else had it. I was sure (because it was constantly reinforced in LDS meetings and publications) that the LDS truth claims were biblical, backed by archeology and history and unassailable by any argument by “gentiles” (non-Mormons).

In 1978, in the middle of my mission in Taiwan, I knocked on the door of a certain Mrs. Chang, a convert to the Catholic faith. I tried to present the LDS missionary lessons to her, but she kept (very politely) stopping me and pointing to bible passages that contradicted the doctrines I was trying to present. It was very frustrating. After about an hour of this, my companion and I left and shook the dust from our feet as a testimony against her.

Five years later, when working at my first real computer programming job, I was approached by a co-worker named Kevin who asked me if I was saved. I didn’t know quite how to respond, but informed him that I was LDS, and therefore in possession of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and that if he wanted to know more, I would happily tell him about it.

The man proceeded to vivisect me doctrinally. He challenged every Mormon tenet and showed me where in the bible it was disproved. I tried several times to disengage but he followed me and peppered me with questions I could not answer or had never thought of. He was so “in my face” that I felt violated and angry. This SOB could not shut me down like that and get away with it. I determined to go home, look up the passages he cited and bring back answers that would have me baptizing him within the month. I was sure I had THE TRUTH.

But when I tried to find rebuttals to the bible passages Kevin cited (which we never studied in LDS Sunday School), I came up empty. There was no rebuttal except “because Joseph Smith said so”. A few days later at work, Kevin approached me and apologized for being so rough on me, but said “sometimes you have to wound people so that they can be healed”. He asked if I had researched the topics we talked about. I admitted that I had tried, but had no ready answers. “That’s okay”, he smiled. “Just keep on searching and questioning”.

I did. I got every LDS book I could get my hands on, including the “History of the Church”, and the entire set of the “Journal of Discourses”, which was way more that I could afford on my salary at the time. I read for hours - The LDS Scriptures, the History of the Church and the JoD- often long into the night. My wife (a 6th-generation Mormon), concerned for my state of mind, joined in my studies (God bless her). I told her about the lovely Mrs. Chang and that SOB Kevin who had upset me so. The more we read, the more appalled we were. Together, over 2 years, we studied our way out of the LDS Church.

Had it not been for the gentle Mrs. Chang, and the confrontational Kevin, I would never have started looking at the objective truth claims of the LDS. I think Mrs. Chang planted the seeds, but the “in your face” Kevin plucked up the tares.

Fourteen years later, after getting over my trust issues with religion, the memory of the gentle Mrs. Chang ( and a few Catholic relatives) helped point me toward the Catholic faith. But without Kevin and his “in your face” apologetics, I would never have questioned nor left the LDS. Thank God for you, Kevin, and for you Mrs. Chang.

I guess what I’m saying is that it takes all kinds of apologists to reach all kinds of people. If everyone I met were as kind-hearted as Mrs. Chang, all we would get is seeds. If everyone were as confrontational as Kevin, all we would get is torn-up fields.

Everyone, keep doing what you are doing, and may God bless you all.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

Very well put, the image of mere seeds or a no-man’s land.

Ironically, the danger of contemporary Catholic apologetics is that it tends to the same cookie-cutter approach that the LDS missionaries have to use, and with the problem of evasiveness or really insufficient or circumlocutious answers becoming habitual.

Blessed John Henry Newman was appalled at the fire-eating complacency of some of those who converted as a result of his example or influence; because he did not launch something comparable to the Oxford movement from the heart of London, preferring to serve the industrial poor in Birmingham, he was considered by many converts to be weak.

Even Martha Beck, who is, for LDS folk, one of the arch-apostates because of her father’s position as ‘the C.S. Lewis of Mormonism’, still lauds the goodness of many of the people she had to leave. One of the difficult things for those raised LDS (I wasn’t, just have friends who have been) is that it’s such an all-encompassing environment, and one in which power is simply exerted without much compunction, because it is what people accuse holy mother Church of being, a religion which is really founded in power politics coupled to claimed visions.

 

[twopekinguys]

Truth and charity do not have to be opposed. The best posts I have found on any Mormon thread are those from Soren1. He simply presents a well thought out, in my opinion, irrefutable argument, with absolutely no personal remarks or snarky comments. He acknowledges the Mormon position as the Mormon position without being rude or crass and then demolishes it with truth. That is affective apologetics.

So the idea that being charitable results in a weak, watered down version of the truth is simply a fallacy. We should never proclaim the truth without charity and understand that charity without truth is no charity at all. We need both. They compliment, rather than oppose each other.

A few things to remember.

1. Not everyone is Soren1
2. Not everyone communicates in the same way
3. Tone is impossible to determine on an internet forum.
4. Some people look for a reason to be upset or insulted.
5. We have all seen mormon’s play the persecution card over and over and over again. More times than not, it isn’t warranted.

Food for thought.

ETA: I have also noticed that the people/posters that have honked off a mormon for whatever reason, has been the primary cause for their studying their way out.

Coincidence? I think not.