Differences between Mormon Missions and Catholic Missions

[KathleenGee]

Again to support Soren’s point of ecclesiology…Catholics and Jews are communal and have God at the center…you see that reflected in the Jewish calendar. In fact the Hebrew Catholics are maintaining the Jewish calendar and you can find out about it on their website…www.hebrewcatholic.org, of which I am an associate…

I heard that the Protestants on the other hand, focus on the will of God and ‘look up to HIm’ to see His will.

I experience the same Christ with Protestants in fellowship. Our worship is different, and then we have the celibate clergy and religious. So I think Catholics are unique with the contribution of celibate coworkers different from Jewish and Protestant cultures.

I was a member at one time of the Legion of Mary. We went out into poor neighborhoods with the neighboring parish as ours was very small and only one family was open. The other neighborhood had alot of minorities. I met a Muslim woman in that one. Many were Baptists. We would look for fallen away Catholics.
But what we experienced was just a deep spiritual depression. I was proposing a new means of evangelizing but some were burnt out.

The best form of evangelization through Catholicism is having a full spiritual life for yourself, and the freedom to go out. But if you have family, then you should put your efforts into building your parish into a loving family. Having your parish a loving family, building a true Christian brotherhood is such a great sign to the world.

That is how the parishes are in the province where my priest missionaries originated.

 

[Murdock]

Soren

I am intrigued by your comment that the BOM is entirely blasphemous. Obviously, we hear constantly that the BOM is not true so that is of no interest. If your view is that the BOM is blasphemous simply because you do not believe it to be true, then never mind. I realize you do not believe the BOM to be true. However, if you have some other reason to view the BOM as blasphemous, then I am curious to know.

In other words, what, other than its allegedly fictional nature, do you feel is wrong with the BOM?

I am sure that I have missed more than I have seen here at CAF. However, as I think about it, I cannot recall a single post critical of the BOM that was anything more than some argument or the other that the BOM is untrue.

Thanks

Murdock

 

[soren1]

Soren

I am intrigued by your comment that the BOM is entirely blasphemous. Obviously, we hear constantly that the BOM is not true so that is of no interest. If your view is that the BOM is blasphemous simply because you do not believe it to be true, then never mind. I realize you do not believe the BOM to be true. However, if you have some other reason to view the BOM as blasphemous, then I am curious to know.

In other words, what, other than its allegedly fictional nature, do you feel is wrong with the BOM?

I am sure that I have missed more than I have seen here at CAF. However, as I think about it, I cannot recall a single post critical of the BOM that was anything more than some argument or the other that the BOM is untrue.

Thanks

Murdock

The reason I have for objecting to the Book of Mormon are too numerous to give in detail. My primary purpose in writing that post was to respond to the assertion that critics of the BOM are mainly ignorant of its contents. I will give a short list of BOM errors related to fundamental theology, since that is most pertinent to the charge of blasphemy:

1. The fact that the BOM is untrue is itself a reason to consider it blasphemous, because it purports to be inspired but is not.
2. The Law of Opposition espouses a version of good/evil dualism that makes good and evil mutually dependent. This means that goodness does not hold primary sway over existence, but shares that status with evil. As a result, God himself is made essentially dependent on evil, which amounts to denying his omnipotence, and evil gets the undue compliment of having an existence in parity with the good. (None of this is to deny that God does in fact use evil to bring about good; only it cannot be accepted that he essentially needs evil to do so.) In contrast to the Law of Opposition are the wonderful passages in Gen 1 in which God looks upon his unsullied creation, yet devoid of evil, and pronounces everything “good.”
3. The doctrine of agency is entirely predicated on the supposition that human freedom is limited if divine power moves the human will. As a result of this assumption, it makes grace contingent upon human free acts, rather than seeing grace as the source of freedom itself. The unexamined assumption of LDS soteriology, that salvation by grace alone involves God “forcing” human beings to act as they do, requires the blasphemous metaphysical presupposition that the touch of God is a harmful, exterior imposition upon the will. In fact, the Creator moves his creatures in ways that are intrinsic to the creatures themselves, without violence, without destruction of freedom, and yet entirely by God’s power and gift as a primary, all-encompassing cause.
4. The Book of Mormon inadvertently denies the sonship of Christ in precisely the same way that LDS leaders, including prophets and apostles in their official teachings, falsely claim that Trinitarians do. Namely, it says that Christ is distinct from the Father insofar as flesh is distinct from the spirit, but not as a person is distinct from another person. The Father is the person that the Son identifies as “me,” while the son is the flesh of that person. (3 Nephi 1:14) With this understanding, the Son is said to be the Father in contexts where “Father” clearly does not mean creator, but specifically means The Father. (Mosiah 15:1-4) Some LDS apologists, as in this article, attempt to reinterpret the texts that establish this teaching. Yet they must bend over backwards, and they can never provide even a semi-plausible account of JST Luke 11:23.

 

[zerinus]

1. The fact that the BOM is untrue is itself a reason to consider it blasphemous, because it purports to be inspired but is not.

I am sure Murdock will want to give a comprehensive answer to all the points you have raised; but I would like to make a brief comment on point # 1. I presume you hold the same opinion about the Koran, because it also claims to be a revelation from God, which I suppose you do not accept. But the Pope evidently didn’t agree with you. In a meeting with Islamic leaders the late Pope kissed the Koran, thus showing his reverence for the book, although I doubt if he considers it to be a genuine revelation. So according to him a book claiming divine inspiration may not be genuine, without at the same time being blasphemous. I don’t think he would have kissed the Koran if he considered it to be blasphemous. There are many links. Here is a typical one.

 

[Pacos_Pete]

Reading the different comments about Mormon Missions, reminds me of the story of three blind men explaining an elephant. One has a hold of the trunk, one has a hold of the ear and one has a hold of the leg.

Most comments come close. How much food is supplied for soup kitchens and Care & Share by the Mormons? How many missionaries are in countries that prohibit proselytizing on humanitarian missions?
How many plane loads of food, quilts, cloths and medical supplies are flown to disaster areas?

As for as a great service organization for feeding the masses during an emergency are the Idaho Baptists. They are well equipped. Each demonstration contributed something besides proselytizing, whether it be cleaning a cemetery, helping children read or visiting the home bound.

My wife and I have served two mission at home, one was in charge of an employment center that has jobs for all demolitions not just Mormons all over the world…

We did mission for two years at home at a cannery operated by the Mormon Church. It provides canned fruit for people of all faiths where ever the need is.

Take off the blindfold go to your local Desert Industries and if there isn’t one where you live ask a missionary or if you can go online to lds.org…

 

[Pacos_Pete]

Reading the different comments about Mormon Missions, reminds me of the story of three blind men explaining an elephant. One has a hold of the trunk, one has a hold of the ear and one has a hold of the leg.

Most comments come close. How much food is supplied for soup kitchens and Care & Share by the Mormons? How many missionaries are in countries that prohibit proselytizing on humanitarian missions?
How many plane loads of food, quilts, cloths and medical supplies are flown to disaster areas?

As for as a great service organization for feeding the masses during an emergency are the Idaho Baptists. They are well equipped. Each demonstration contributed something besides proselytizing, whether it be cleaning a cemetery, helping children read or visiting the home bound.

My wife and I have served two mission at home, one was in charge of an employment center that has jobs for all demolitions not just Mormons all over the world…

We did mission for two years at home at a cannery operated by the Mormon Church. It provides canned fruit for people of all faiths where ever the need is.

Take off the blindfold go to your local Desert Industries and if there isn’t one where you live ask a missionary or if you can go online to lds.org…

 

[twopekinguys]

Reading the different comments about Mormon Missions, reminds me of the story of three blind men explaining an elephant. One has a hold of the trunk, one has a hold of the ear and one has a hold of the leg.

Most comments come close. How much food is supplied for soup kitchens and Care & Share by the Mormons? How many missionaries are in countries that prohibit proselytizing on humanitarian missions?
How many plane loads of food, quilts, cloths and medical supplies are flown to disaster areas?

As for as a great service organization for feeding the masses during an emergency are the Idaho Baptists. They are well equipped. Each demonstration contributed something besides proselytizing, whether it be cleaning a cemetery, helping children read or visiting the home bound.

My wife and I have served two mission at home, one was in charge of an employment center that has jobs for all demolitions not just Mormons all over the world…

We did mission for two years at home at a cannery operated by the Mormon Church. It provides canned fruit for people of all faiths where ever the need is.

Take off the blindfold go to your local Desert Industries and if there isn’t one where you live ask a missionary or if you can go online to lds.org…

And you don’t think Catholics do everything you describe, plus much more?

Many, many parishes offer a food pantry. Many many parishes offer a soup kitchen, and even shelter for the homeless.

Catholic social services, and Catholic Relief Services aids people not only in this country, but those where a disaster may have hit. This is done in the form of food, clothing, blankets, housing, and medical care.

The biggest difference between mormons providing aid, and various Catholic agencies providing aid is that the Catholic organizations don’t issue a press release everytime. The second biggest difference is, in the vast majority of cases, the Catholic organizations are there before any other type of charitable relief arrives, and stays much longer after everyone else leaves.

The only reason there are mormons in countries that don’t allow proselytizing is because Catholic missionaries broke ground, and were there first.

One thing I must add is that all relief provided by Catholic relief organizatons is done without any active proseltyzing. Unfortunately, that is not always the case with mormon missionaries.

 

[KathleenGee]

Catholics – who are truly being called – preach only Christ and His church. They do not go out knocking down other religions. Ours is a public, transparent work and we do not need to condemn other people.

The Adventists were doing this. The native people told us what they were saying about us, and they ended up becoming Catholic.

My parish collections go to many, many people who are not Catholic through various groups and agencies. We got the list past this year. It revealed a long list of community organizations.

 

[dianaiad]

And you don’t think Catholics do everything you describe, plus much more?

I’m quite sure they do.

The problem is, it’s not the MORMONS in here who began taking pot shots and snipes at the Catholics, comparing the work done by the two organizations to the detriment of the Catholics, now, was it?

This entire thread was begun by, and continued by, Catholics who were looking down their noses at the Mormon idea of missionary work, remember?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Discussing differences is not an attack.

 

[zerinus]

Murdock hasn’t replied to your post yet, so I will take a stab at answering your point #2:

1. The Law of Opposition espouses a version of good/evil dualism that makes good and evil mutually dependent. This means that goodness does not hold primary sway over existence, but shares that status with evil. As a result, God himself is made essentially dependent on evil, which amounts to denying his omnipotence, and evil gets the undue compliment of having an existence in parity with the good. (None of this is to deny that God does in fact use evil to bring about good; only it cannot be accepted that he essentially needs evil to do so.) In contrast to the Law of Opposition are the wonderful passages in Gen 1 in which God looks upon his unsullied creation, yet devoid of evil, and pronounces everything "good."

With the last quote you have contradicted and negated everything else you have said! How could everything God had created be “good,” if it could not have been “evil”? How can the concept of “good” exist, if it is not in contrast with the concept of “evil”? It does not mean that God’s work had to be evil, or even partially evil. What it means is that the concept of good cannot exist except in contrast with the concept of evil, which I should have thought to be too logical and obvious to be questioned or denied. This is how Lehi teaches this doctrine in the Book of Mormon:

2 Nephi 2:

10 And because of the intercession for all, all men come unto God; wherefore, they stand in the presence of him, to be judged of him according to the truth and holiness which is in him. Wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One hath given, unto the inflicting of the punishment which is affixed, which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement—
11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.
12 Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.
13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.
14 And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and he hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be acted upon.
15 And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man, after he had created our first parents, and the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and in fine, all things which are created, it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.
16 Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other.

It doesn’t say that God’s work was evil, or had to be evil, or contain any evil. It simply says that the opposite of it also had to be represented so that man could contrast between the two—otherwise, what is your explanation for the presence of Satan, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil, in the Garden of Eden?

 

[RebeccaJ]

God’s Good is not reliant on evil.

 

[StevieD]

1. Most comments come close. How much food is supplied for soup kitchens and Care & Share by the Mormons? How many missionaries are in countries that prohibit proselytizing on humanitarian missions?
   How many plane loads of food, quilts, cloths and medical supplies are flown to disaster areas?
2. As for as a great service organization for feeding the masses during an emergency are the Idaho Baptists. They are well equipped. Each demonstration contributed something besides proselytizing, whether it be cleaning a cemetery, helping children read or visiting the home bound.
3. My wife and I have served two mission at home, one was in charge of an employment center that has jobs for all demolitions not just Mormons all over the world…
4. We did mission for two years at home at a cannery operated by the Mormon Church. It provides canned fruit for people of all faiths where ever the need is.

1. We would very much like to know but your ‘church’ is extremely secretive about its income and expenditure.
2. Please check out the Missionaries of Charity and the Missionaries of the Poor, these orders are full of young people who give up their whole lives to serving the poorest of the poor with absolutely no ‘agenda’ other than love.
3. Are you telling us that you were not expected to fill a quota of baptisms from your clients?
4. So this was not a ‘hook’ for converts? Anyone could just walk in and walk out with goods without having a ‘chat’ or leaving any personal details whatever?

I have met many of your missionaries, not one of them asked me if I had any material needs, whether I was employed, whether I could use some free food. They all gave me their ‘testimony’ and invited me to read my free copy of the Book of Mormon.

There are enormous differences between the whole concept of missionary endeavour between Catholicism and your 'church. When have you produced a hero/heroine like Mother Teresa or Saint Damien or their many, predecessors? .

 

[dianaiad]

Discussing differences is not an attack.

[intense sarcasm] Of course not, Rebecca. [/intense sarcasm]

…and discussing those differences by saying that Catholic missions are all about helping the poor all over the place—but NOT aimed at getting Catholic converts, whereas Mormon missionaries only help Mormons, or if they help anybody else, it’s a deceitful tactic meant only to attract new converts…that’s not attacking AT all, is it?

 

[dianaiad]

1. We would very much like to know but your ‘church’ is extremely secretive about its income and expenditure.

Not that secretive…but something tells me that if we did trumpet what we did, you would be criticizing us for being…out for the publicity. However, you can learn something about it at lds.org. Use the search term “Latter-day Saint charities.”

1. Please check out the Missionaries of Charity and the Missionaries of the Poor, these orders are full of young people who give up their whole lives to serving the poorest of the poor with absolutely no ‘agenda’ other than love.

That’s fine. I don’t see any Mormons in here criticizing the Catholics. Of course, you do have over a billion members…WHAT is the percentage of people who perform charity work, vs. the percentage of Mormons who do?

I’m asking, not hinting. I honestly don’t know the answer. It seems obvious, though, that with a billion members, as opposed to our mere 13 million, the Catholics should be providing…how does that math go…76 TIMES as much help for the poor and needy that Mormons do.

Are you? Again, I don’t know the answer. I’m just asking the question.

1. Are you telling us that you were not expected to fill a quota of baptisms from your clients?

I wasn’t. I don’t know anybody who was.

1. So this was not a ‘hook’ for converts? Anyone could just walk in and walk out with goods without having a ‘chat’ or leaving any personal details whatever?

Define ‘chat,’ and ‘personal details.’

If you are talking about interviews to find out what they needed, and things like phone numbers and addresses, probably not. If you are talking about making people sit down and listen to the missionary lessons, then…yeah, I rather doubt that this was required.

I imagine, though, that non-members would be asked to provide the same information that members did. You know…where you lived, what you needed, stuff like that.

I have met many of your missionaries, not one of them asked me if I had any material needs, whether I was employed, whether I could use some free food. They all gave me their ‘testimony’ and invited me to read my free copy of the Book of Mormon.

Did you LOOK like you needed any of that? I don’t know of any Catholic missionaries who do that.

However, you can bet that if you had been in Haiti right after the earthquake, those would have been questions you would have recieved.

There are enormous differences between the whole concept of missionary endeavour between Catholicism and your 'church. When have you produced a hero/heroine like Mother Teresa or Saint Damien or their many, predecessors? .

We have quite a few. We do not make Saints of them, though, because they are already saints. We are ALL supposed to be aiming for that level of service. Just because those tho whom we look up to…our heros…are more private than yours, and we don’t build statues to them, light candles to them and pray to them, it doesn’t mean that such people do not exist and have not spent their lives in service to others.

…and I think that you need to stop deciding that all Mormons are evil and selfish simply because you can’t stand the thought that anybody who disagrees with you regarding religion MUST be worthy of nothing but hellfire and condemnation.

 

[PaulDupre]

Here is their latest: Two Mormon missionaries jailed for rape.

 

[dianaiad]

Here is their latest: Two Mormon missionaries jailed for rape.

Paul, if these two missionaries did what they were accused of, they deserve everything they get and more.

Now.

Are you going to use this example of wrongdoing by a pair of LDS missionaries to somehow prove that all Mormon missionaries, and LDS missionary work, is evil/selfish/wrong/ pick one?

Be very, very, very careful about what you post next.

…and remember; I have never used the ‘pediphile priest’ thing against Catholics; not against the faith, not against the priesthood and not against any work that Catholics do. In fact, whenever I get in the middle of that conversation, I always get in on the side of the Catholics; it is my opinion that the reason there seems to me more sexual predators in the Catholic priesthood isn’t because Catholicism is somehow evil; quite the contrary. First, the relative numbers are very low, and second, men who do this sort of thing specifically target positions where they can get that sort of power/access to victims; they are victimising the church every inch as much as they victimize their young targets. If the priesthood did NOT do the great good it does, it wouldn’t make such a marvelous base for such activities. The same principle applies to those predators who become scoutmasters and youth ministers in other religions.

Evil men will find the best way to further their aims, and they don’t care whether the organization they pick is harmed by their actions.

OK, there’s that.

Now. Would you care to explain why you thought that this…bit of news…was an appropriate thing to share in this thread…especially when you know what it lays Catholicism open to, if someone replies using precisely the same logic you have used here?

In other words…

What in the world were you THINKING???

 

[LongJourney]

Generally speaking, perhaps, just possibly perhaps, by raising the bar, the LDS church has LOWERED the bar. Young men, pressured by their parents to go on a mission, end up lying about their personal shortcomings. Those who tell the truth end up disqualifying themselves. Of course, those who lie about their personal imperfections will be more comfortable with other forms of dishonesty, even such mild forms of dishonesty as convert preparedness, and telling untruths about LDS doctrines and teachings and scripture…

Not only that, but I have read that, despite the LDS church’s emphasis on cultural homogeneity, many foreign LDS communities might morph in strange directions. We just do not know what happened there. Personally, I think that the LDS church in Africa might be very strange, given the emphasis in the BoM on the virtues of people with light skin color. How that is translated is quite another question.

Polygamy and the sexual history of Joseph Smith with young women might be very interesting to young men, not acquainted with present-day American LDS culture.

 

[dianaiad]

Generally speaking, perhaps, just possibly perhaps, by raising the bar, the LDS church has LOWERED the bar. Young men, pressured by their parents to go on a mission, end up lying about their personal shortcomings. Those who tell the truth end up disqualifying themselves. Of course, those who lie about their personal imperfections will be more comfortable with other forms of dishonesty, even such mild forms of dishonesty as convert preparedness, and telling untruths about LDS doctrines and teachings and scripture…

Not only that, but I have read that, despite the LDS church’s emphasis on cultural homogeneity, many foreign LDS communities might morph in strange directions. We just do not know what happened there. Personally, I think that the LDS church in Africa might be very strange, given the emphasis in the BoM on the virtues of people with light skin color. How that is translated is quite another question.

Polygamy and the sexual history of Joseph Smith with young women might be very interesting to young men, not acquainted with present-day American LDS culture.

You have ‘read that…’ where, precisely?

As well, you are following in Paul’s keystrokes here, and both of you are treading on thin and cracking ice.

 

[LongJourney]

Not only that, but I have read that, despite the LDS church’s emphasis on cultural homogeneity, many foreign LDS communities might morph in strange directions.

Sorry for skipping over that. I am writing about some of the cultural variances of Pacific Island LDS people. You can search the boards for this. I am sure you are acquainted with internet research techniques, and some of the other boards that I frequent, even if you refuse to check them out.