… suggests … hearing a case for unique Mormon beliefs held by the early church… have presented their views as anti-Catholic… goal is not to prove why the early church was Mormon, but to show why it was not Catholic
Hello Stephen,
I have no idea what will be shown on this thread, I am going to ask.
What I believe could be shown is that the ECF were not Catholic. That when you said, “The ECF were Catholic not Mormon” you were only half right as I pointed out on the other thread. Instead, the earliest ECF were EDS (early day saints).
The ECF were EDS. A POST-Apostolic authority developed that relied upon a faith delivered via scripture and public revelation but which maintained that NOBODY could receive any more public revelation. What the Pastor of Hermas calls “a much inferior place” was prepared for those who didn’t embrace the Apostolic Church before it rejected the idea that God leads mankind by public revelation and closed the door to such a necessary corrective force. Doctrines then DEVELOPED without Public Revelation to help and SOME of these development had corrosive effects.
Also, since this thread is in response to a request by a Catholic poster AND that request was made in response to your claim that “the ECF were Catholic not Mormon,” I was planning on focusing on places were the DEVELOPED Christianity departed from the ORIGINAL Christianity and the CoJCoLDS SOMEHOW taught the ORIGINAL Christianity. The beliefs of folks like my Catholic friend Rory are IMO the strongest 2nd (which is really a complement to Catholicism).
As I said to adamhovey1988, one response would be that the CoJCoLDS threw thousands of weird beliefs at the wall, some of them are bound to filter through “ORIGINAL and not CURRENT” doctrines of Catholicism. My argument against this is that the rejection of creation ex nihilo, divine passibility and embodiment, rejection of metaphysical monotheism (in favor of monarchical and social monotheism), and a strong belief in deification all weave together in ways beyond the throw it at the wall and see what sticks criticism. This is specifically because they are “foundational slips.”
Gazelem seems to have focused on another trend that is also impressive IMO. The movement from a supernatural church with miracles and profound contact between God and man to a more naturalistic church. This included the movement of sacraments like Baptism from being primarily a two way covenant between God and man and secondarily a vehicle for Grace (that perhaps places an indelible mark upon the soul) to being primarily a vehicle for undetectable grace and less about the genuine two way contact and covenant between God and man (understandings of original sin could be included here). This includes the movement from a church lead by public revelation with an open canon to a church without public revelation and only a closed canon. A movement from all members receive revelation and lead families/congregation to the radical divide between laity / religious.
Charity, TOm
