Do Catholics and Mormons have a "common reference point in the person and gospel of Jesus Christ?"

[Cachonga]

I came upon a very interesting article this morning (see here). It seems that the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) "… acknowledge a common reference point in the person and the gospel of Jesus Christ.” (this according to ‘His Eminence Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I.’, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Chicago). Can anyone please explain what the “person and gospel of Jesus Christ”, as taught by Rome, has in common with the teachings of the Mormons?

 

[Della]

I don’t think his statement can be understood without the rest of the sentence:

“Our churches have different histories and systems of belief and practice, although we acknowledge a common reference point in the person and the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

Clearly, he isn’t saying that Mormons and Catholics believe the same things only that both derive their beliefs from the person of Christ and his gospel. That can be taken many ways, but I don’t think we can read indifferentism into it, only an acknowledgement that Mormons, like Catholics, believe in the historical person Jesus Christ and that he came to bring us the good news. Reading more into it than that would be mere speculation at best and at worst a determined effort to see some kind of compromise of belief, which the Cardinal clearly did not have in mind.

 

[Cachonga]

Della:

I don’t think his statement can be understood without the rest of the sentence:

That’s why I included the link (so anyone who is interested can see the entire article).

Clearly, he isn’t saying that Mormons and Catholics believe the same things only that both derive their beliefs from the person of Christ and his gospel. That can be taken many ways, but I don’t think we can read indifferentism into it, only an acknowledgement that Mormons, like Catholics, believe in the historical person Jesus Christ and that he came to bring us the good news. Reading more into it than that would be mere speculation at best and at worst a determined effort to see some kind of compromise of belief, which the Cardinal clearly did not have in mind.

OK, let’s say that the Catholics and Mormons have a common belief in the historicity of Jesus Christ (even though Mormons believe he is the “spiritual brother” of Lucifer, and is actually one of many “spiritual” children the father begat on another planet). The Mormons believe the “good news” of the gospel of Jesus is that he showed us how we, too, could become gods (like the father did). Where is the “common reference point” for Catholics and Mormons?

 

[Della]

That’s why I included the link (so anyone who is interested can see the entire article).

OK, let’s say that the Catholics and Mormons have a common belief in the historicity of Jesus Christ (even though Mormons believe he is the “spiritual brother” of Lucifer, and is actually one of many “spiritual” children the father begat on another planet). The Mormons believe the “good news” of the gospel of Jesus is that he showed us how we, too, could become gods (like the father did). Where is the “common reference point” for Catholics and Mormons?

Simply that they believe he preached the good news, not that the good news we believe is what they believe. The Cardinal was trying to establish what common ground he could find without saying we believe the same things.

I have no wish to defend Mormon beliefs, but surely their belief that Jesus was Lucifer’s brother would mean they were brothers before Lucifer became Satan. If so, it’s no slur on the character of Jesus. They’re all wrong about that, of course, but we shouldn’t tar them with something they themselves would find repugnant. They very much venerate the person of Jesus, even if they do have their theology all twisted up.

 

[Cachonga]

Della:

Simply that they believe he preached the good news, not that the good news we believe is what they believe. The Cardinal was trying to establish what common ground he could find without saying we believe the same things.

“He also lauded the growing relationship between the Catholic Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and their joint efforts, such as providing aid to the poor and needy and combating pornography.” (see here). That sounds like common ground to me. Why bring up the “person and gospel of Jesus Christ” (especially since they are so far apart from one another)?

I have no wish to defend Mormon beliefs, but surely their belief that Jesus was Lucifer’s brother would mean they were brothers before Lucifer became Satan. If so, it’s no slur on the character of Jesus. They’re all wrong about that, of course, but we shouldn’t tar them with something they themselves would find repugnant. They very much venerate the person of Jesus, even if they do have their theology all twisted up.

Are you saying that Jesus (who is the second person of the Trinity) could be a “spiritual brother” of Lucifer (one of His creations)?

 

[Church_Militant]

I came upon a very interesting article this morning (see here). It seems that the Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) "… acknowledge a common reference point in the person and the gospel of Jesus Christ.” (this according to ‘His Eminence Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I.’, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Chicago). Can anyone please explain what the “person and gospel of Jesus Christ”, as taught by Rome, has in common with the teachings of the Mormons?

What’s so hard to understand? The speech is about freedom in society to practice one’s religion and voice our respective influences freely …not about doctrine, in which Catholics and Mormons have only our reference to Jesus Christ and the Bible in common.

It looks to me more like someone read the article with a preconceived agenda.

Here’s what he’s actually talking about.

   In his address,             Cardinal George explained that religious freedom cannot be             reduced to just freedom of worship or even freedom of             private conscience, but that individual and religious groups             must have the right to exercise their influence in the             public square.     
            “The lesson of             American history is that churches and other religious bodies             prosper in a nation and a social order that respects             religious freedom and recognizes that civil government             should never stand between the consciences and the religious             practices of its citizens and Almighty God,” he said.

 

[Church_Militant]

Are you saying that Jesus (who is the second person of the Trinity) could be a “spiritual brother” of Lucifer (one of His creations)?

See what I mean about that agenda? You wish the Cardinal was saying what you have so far suggested, but it’s not there. You’d be wise to read things objectively instead with what appears to be an a-C agenda.

**“Our churches have different histories and systems of belief and practice, although we acknowledge a common reference point in the person and the gospel of Jesus Christ.” **

 

[Della]

“He also lauded the growing relationship between the Catholic Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and their joint efforts, such as providing aid to the poor and needy and combating pornography.” (see here). That sounds like common ground to me. Why bring up the “person and gospel of Jesus Christ” (especially since they are so far apart from one another)?

That you’d have to ask the Cardinal. My feeling is he was simply trying to say we need to work together on a common problem and making as solid a case for that as he could. Nothing more.

Are you saying that Jesus (who is the second person of the Trinity) could be a “spiritual brother” of Lucifer (one of His creations)?

Considering I went out of my way to say just the opposite how could you possibly ask that? As Church Militant wrote, you need to read/hear what’s actually been written/said not read into statements things that are not there just because you have need to disprove Mormonism. I neither believe in Mormonism nor have any desire to promote it, but I will not call it what it isn’t nor make up beliefs they don’t hold in order to try to disprove it. Nor will I read into the Cardinal’s words what isn’t there in order to justify things that would make me feel more comfortable. That isn’t fair, and is, to put it plainly, downright dishonest. And that doesn’t help anyone. I hope you don’t have either intention. I will assume you don’t.

 

[Cachonga]

Church Militant:

What’s so hard to understand? The speech is about freedom in society to practice one’s religion and voice our respective influences freely …not about doctrine, in which Catholics and Mormons have only our reference to Jesus Christ and the Bible in common.

Since Cardinal George said “Our churches have different histories and systems of belief and practice, although we acknowledge a common reference point in the person and the gospel of Jesus Christ.” (emphasis mine), I am asking how it is that Catholics and Mormons have “a common reference point in the person and gospel of Jesus Christ” (as Cardinal George stated). These are his words, not mine. If you can’t answer the question, that’s fine, but please stop the ad hominem.

See what I mean about that agenda? You wish the Cardinal was saying what you have so far suggested, but it’s not there. You’d be wise to read things objectively instead with what appears to be an a-C agenda.

Here, I was trying to get a clarification from Della on her last comment (she seemed to imply this was what she believed).

 

[Cachonga]

Della:

Considering I went out of my way to say just the opposite how could you possibly ask that? As Church Militant wrote, you need to read/hear what’s actually been written/said not read into statements things that are not there just because you have need to disprove Mormonism. I neither believe in Mormonism nor have any desire to promote it, but I will not call it what it isn’t nor make up beliefs they don’t hold in order to try to disprove it. Nor will I read into the Cardinal’s words what isn’t there in order to justify things that would make me feel more comfortable. That isn’t fair, and is, to put it plainly, downright dishonest. And that doesn’t help anyone. I hope you don’t have either intention. I will assume you don’t.

Thank you for the clarification. The way your last post was worded was a bit confusing. It seems to me, though, that you can’t answer the original question (Can anyone please explain what the “person and gospel of Jesus Christ”, as taught by Rome, has in common with the teachings of the Mormons?), which is based on Cardinal George’s own words. Instead, you seem to be trying to downplay his comment. Since I am quoting Cardinal George and asking for an explanation, I don’t see how that could be considered unfair or dishonest. And for the record, I am not a Mormon, nor do I consider them to be Christian.

 

[Della]

Thank you for the clarification. The way your last post was worded was a bit confusing. It seems to me, though, that you can’t answer the original question (Can anyone please explain what the “person and gospel of Jesus Christ”, as taught by Rome, has in common with the teachings of the Mormons?), which is based on Cardinal George’s own words. Instead, you seem to be trying to downplay his comment. Since I am quoting Cardinal George and asking for an explanation, I don’t see how that could be considered unfair or dishonest. And for the record, I am not a Mormon, nor do I consider them to be Christian.

What I was trying to say about the Cardinal’s comment is that you are making more of it than he intended. I did say what I thought he meant. That he didn’t mean anything deeper than that won’t satisfy you, though. You can’t pull a comment like that from its greater context and make something out of it that wasn’t intended. It seems like what you want us to do is agree with you that he stated a common belief in Christ that the Mormons hold. He didn’t say that, in fact he went out of his way to say our beliefs differ, but you won’t have it. We’ve already told you what he meant, so what more do you want?

 

[Cachonga]

Della:

What I was trying to say about the Cardinal’s comment is that you are making more of it than he intended. I did say what I thought he meant. That he didn’t mean anything deeper than that won’t satisfy you, though. You can’t pull a comment like that from its greater context and make something out of it that wasn’t intended. It seems like what you want us to do is agree with you that he stated a common belief in Christ that the Mormons hold. He didn’t say that, in fact he went out of his way to say our beliefs differ, but you won’t have it. We’ve already told you what he meant, so what more do you want?

Actually, all you did was point out the context in which the comment was made and that they both recognize the historical Jesus, but the question remains unanswered. Perhaps I should rephrase the question - If you believe that Catholics and Mormons have “a common reference point in the person and gospel of Jesus Christ” (as stated by Cardinal George), could you please explain these common reference points?

 

[garysibio]

Sometimes we bend over backwards trying to find a point of commonality with another religious group that we get twisted all out of shape. It’s almost to the point of saying that Catholics and Satan worshippers have something in common - we both believe in Satan.

Mormons are polytheists. They believe that any faithful Mormon male can possibly rise to the level of being declared a god and given a planet to rule over. They believe that God the Father was once human. Jesus was born human - not both human and divine - and became divine and given Earth as His planet to rule.

Despite what Cardinal George said, I just don’t believe there is any common ground of any significance between Catholics and Mormons.

 

[Della]

Actually, all you did was point out the context in which the comment was made and that they both recognize the historical Jesus, but the question remains unanswered. Perhaps I should rephrase the question - If you believe that Catholics and Mormons have “a common reference point in the person and gospel of Jesus Christ” (as stated by Cardinal George), could you please explain these common reference points?

I already did. I’m not going to waste time and effort.

garysibio:

Despite what Cardinal George said, I just don’t believe there is any common ground of any significance between Catholics and Mormons.

The common ground we definitely share is our need to stand up for the rights of religious people to express their faith in the public square. That’s what the Cardinal was driving at. We can share that much with any non-Christian group. Freedom of religion is vitally important when there is a loud call from a minority for freedom from religion in America.

As to the Cardinals remarks noted in this thread, as I’ve already said, I explained what I believe the Cardinal was attempting to convey. If anyone is unsure what he meant I suggest they write the Cardinal’s office for clarification. I cannot speak for him, and I don’t believe we should be guessing or speculating based of a few words taken out of context in a speech about an entirely different topic.

 

[garysibio]

The common ground we definitely share is our need to stand up for the rights of religious people to express their faith in the public square. That’s what the Cardinal was driving at. We can share that much with any non-Christian group. Freedom of religion is vitally important when there is a loud call from a minority for freedom from religion in America.

As to the Cardinals remarks noted in this thread, as I’ve already said, I explained what I believe the Cardinal was attempting to convey. If anyone is unsure what he meant I suggest they write the Cardinal’s office for clarification. I cannot speak for him, and I don’t believe we should be guessing or speculating based of a few words taken out of context in a speech about an entirely different topic.

When I was an Evangelical I used to read a lot of Francis Schaeffer. He talked about relationships like this saying that we can be what he called co-combatants with people with whom we have major theological disputes.

What’s more important? To have another group that sides with us on some social issues or to evangelize these people? The purpose of the Church is to spread the Gospel. Sometimes that means confronting society and it’s nice to have some support but it is more important to lead them to the truth.

 

[Della]

When I was an Evangelical I used to read a lot of Francis Schaeffer. He talked about relationships like this saying that we can be what he called co-combatants with people with whom we have major theological disputes.

What’s more important? To have another group that sides with us on some social issues or to evangelize these people? The purpose of the Church is to spread the Gospel. Sometimes that means confronting society and it’s nice to have some support but it is more important to lead them to the truth.

And Catholics are evangelizing Mormons and all other non-Christian groups. However, the Cardinal was giving a speech before a Mormon audience on the very specific topic of a common need to stand up for religious freedom in America. It was not the time and place to go into theological differences or preach a sermon about repentance. There’s a time and a place for everything.

For other people’s views on this same topic see the thread in Traditional Catholicism: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=430627.

 

[garysibio]

And Catholics are evangelizing Mormons and all other non-Christian groups. However, the Cardinal was giving a speech before a Mormon audience on the very specific topic of a common need to stand up for religious freedom in America. It was not the time and place to go into theological differences or preach a sermon about repentance. There’s a time and a place for everything.

For other people’s views on this same topic see the thread in Traditional Catholicism: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=430627.

It seems to me that when you are in front of a bunch of Mormons would be the ideal time to share the gospel. Kinda like Paul in front of the Aereopagus.

 

[Della]

It seems to me that when you are in front of a bunch of Mormons would be the ideal time to share the gospel. Kinda like Paul in front of the Aereopagus.

And what did Paul do? He found a commonalty between what he wanted to tell them and what the already believed. He didn’t stand there and declare them heretics and expect them to “get with the program”. He took a first step in helping them understand that truth is universal which gave him a springboard for discussion. The Cardinal did the same thing. It cannot but help Mormons to see a Cardinal in full regalia telling them that they don’t have everything wrong, which they don’t, and that we can talk to each other in a civil manner about a topic we can both agree on. Building bridges takes time and every bridge has it’s own proper means of construction for where it is and what it is meant to used for. A one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work in bridge building nor in communicating with those of other faiths.

 

[garysibio]

And what did Paul do? He found a commonalty between what he wanted to tell them and what the already believed. He didn’t stand there and declare them heretics and expect them to “get with the program”. He took a first step in helping them understand that truth is universal which gave him a springboard for discussion. The Cardinal did the same thing. It cannot but help Mormons to see a Cardinal in full regalia telling them that they don’t have everything wrong, which they don’t, and that we can talk to each other in a civil manner about a topic we can both agree on. Building bridges takes time and every bridge has it’s own proper means of construction for where it is and what it is meant to used for. A one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work in bridge building nor in communicating with those of other faiths.

Paul used that commonality to preach the gospel, not recruit the Greeks to a social cause.

 

[Della]

Paul used that commonality to preach the gospel, not recruit the Greeks to a social cause.

But the Cardinal was asked to speak on a specific topic to a specific audience for a specific purpose. As I wrote, there’s a time and a place for everything. If you are ever elevated to cardinal and have such an opportunity, you can do whatever you want. I think the Cardinal set the right tone for the venue. You free to disagree.