Ecumenism with the LDS Church

[zaffiroborant]

I’m not talking about the Holy See specifically. I mean the way Catholics interact with LDS scholarship and encourage the LDS to respond to Catholic protests against the faith. I’d like to see more back-and-forth, I guess, and not so much one-sidedness.

This probably seems bigger to me given how permeating LDS culture is where I live. I doubt the Holy Father or much of the cardinalate give much attention to this relatively obscure sect, at least in their minds.

How can anyone really address LDS scholarship? Not a one of the scholars that write about the LDS church have any authority to speak for the church and it’s beliefs as a whole. If the ones who receive revelation for the church do not put forth any “scholarship” on the subject why engage it? For instance where is the scholarship concerning the churches latest revelation about the children of gay couples? The first presidency hasn’t published anything that would let others respond.

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

Oh Ok, that makes more sense. Thanks for the clarification.

I think where that would be challenge is in terms of scholarship. Im not sure how many LDS scholars there are that would have working knowledge of ancient Greek and Hebrew and ancient Hebrew cultures? Maybe there are? I honestly don’t know.

I remember when I was going thru RCIA and dealing with our pastoral associate in the process. She was working on her PH.D and we had some good conversations about Mormonism and Catholicism when she found out I had been LDS.

She did some research on her own and she came away with the impression of how little scholarship that there was and such an under-developed doctrine.

Remember, the Universal Church as well as Orthodoxy traces all they way back to the Early Church Fathers. She pretty much found Mormonism as an obscure American sect with severe doctrinal distortions.

You mentioned their underdeveloped doctrine. The LDS would say that the Catholic Church would have an unfair advantage in doctrinal dialogue because the LDS have to develop their doctrine further just like the Catholic Church did. So even though I think good discussion of our two faiths would be helpful, I can’t see it happening because of this hurdle. What do you think?

 

[Marie5890]

But beyond social issues, if we were to discuss doctrine with the LDS, I think it’s important to ask the LDS to be transparent about what they believe, and in so doing I think that will highlight just how disorganized their theology is even among each other. I don’t know where I was going with this; I just feel that Catholics are reaching out to Mormons with the same dull methods.

I think right now the LDS church is trying to deal with it’s own crisis of faith in a significant amount of it’s people. esp., the youth.

Just this past week one of their GA’s gave a talk to their educational system and saying how they had to do a different and better job in preparing their young people. I know that the LDS church over the past couple of years is making strides in becoming more transparent about it’s real history and not what they have been teaching in their classes over the past decades. I think Ballard is calling for something he deemed “doctrinal mastery”. He wants the young people to be more up to date with what the LDS church as put out in it’s “essays” and wants them used.

I expect that as these young people become more educated, then more fruitful dialogue can take place. Why? Because they will then be dealing with facts, and not the revisionist history of the LDS past.

I think when that happens, then the next hurdle is how to communicate? So many times the same words are used, but their meanings are very different for each faith’s understanding

 

[jane_doe]

Broad question for Catholics here:

Are you willing to respectful dialogue and work with someone who has different beliefs and culture than you?

Edit: I’m asking with the creedal vs non-creedal culture in mind.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Amen!!

I also think this eloquently illustrates another cultural difference between the two: Roman formal structured arguments, and LDS informal personal belief. I don’t think either culture should go away- they are both quite beautiful, but a mutual deeper appreciation and dialogue would be downright wonder.

I think this gets to another cultural difference between us, Catholics do have formal structured beliefs and arguments but they also have a varied, deep personal belief and spiritual practices. But we don’t have a general culture and structure that involves sharing these with “the group”.

 

[Marie5890]

You mentioned their underdeveloped doctrine. The LDS would say that the Catholic Church would have an unfair advantage in doctrinal dialogue because the LDS have to develop their doctrine further just like the Catholic Church did. So even though I think good discussion of our two faiths would be helpful, I can’t see it happening because of this hurdle. What do you think?

I think doctrinally, it would be very difficult to have any serious dialogue. They are just too different. I mean look at our dialogue with the Orthodox. Doctrinally we are SO CLOSE, and that has not been easy, and still isn’t.

I think on social issues, that is the common ground. That is the water in the well that we share.

Doctrinally, we are just tooooo different

 

[Marie5890]

I guess it depends what one means by ecumenism. Obviously there is significant common ground on social issues and charitable programs, and the two churches are already cooperating on those to a great degree (i.e., Prop 8 in California). ** But sometimes people take ecumenism to mean the compromising of Catholic teaching or doctrine in order to make nice with others. This is false ecumenism and ultimately leads nowhere.**

.

^^^^^THIS in bold

 

[Marie5890]

Unfortunately, the LDS Church from its beginning took a very strong stand against the Catholic Church (and all other churches for that matter) by naming us all “abominations”, “the church of the devil”, etc. This is found in their scripture so they can never totally get away from it no matter how relations have improved since then. When confronted, LDS often try to downplay this aspect of their faith by being wishy-washy about it, but it’s there in black and white, and certainly reflects the true beliefs of early LDS leaders like Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, who made it pretty clear what that all meant.

Oh and it was found in the temple ceremony before it was changed.
In one scene it has Lucifer saying the following (When I went thru the temple in the 80’s this was still part of the ceremony)

“LUCIFER: Then with that enmity I will take the treasures of the earth, and with gold and silver I will buy up armies and navies, popes and priests…”

There was a very very strong anti-Catholicism thread in Mormonism in the 19th and up until that last part of the 20th century…

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

I think doctrinally, it would be very difficult to have any serious dialogue. They are just too different. I mean look at our dialogue with the Orthodox. Doctrinally we are SO CLOSE, and that has not been easy, and still isn’t.

I think on social issues, that is the common ground. That is the water in the well that we share.

Doctrinally, we are just tooooo different

I think you’re probably right. The LDS aren’t the heretics we’ve seen in the past (not calling LDS heretics; that wouldn’t be a proper use of the term), who don’t just deviate on a specific doctrine but rather reject the whole pile. Plus, Arius was at least willing to sit down to a debate.

The moment LDS doctrine is formalized, it will be torn to utter shreds by good philosophers. The reason we can’t discuss doctrine on a formal basis is because WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE LDS BELIEVE!

 

[Marie5890]

One of the most obvious is how they see people of other faiths. They don’t see us as Catholics or Presbyterians or Lutherans or whatever. Instead, most LDS (and I’m certain many of you have had this experience) see all people in one of two ways: member or non-member. That is their paradigm in which they operate, and governs their first impressions of “gentiles,” as they call us within their own circles. It affects how they treat you, confide in you, trust you, etc. It’s not their fault. It’s just a natural consequence of the culture of their church–how they are raised to see the outside world. I have had this experience myself many times. It used to make me mad. Now it makes me laugh. What they don’t realize is behaving this way demeans the rest of us, because it implies some kind of patronizing superiority they unconsciously exude. They don’t even realize they are doing it.

When I meet someone my first idea of that person is not whether they are Catholic or not. I don’t really care. But it’s different for Mormons. The first thing they think about you is member or non-member, and everything starts from that perspective. Now of course, just like any other large population with any issue, there are surely many LDS who don’t see the world this way, but most do.

Ecumenism with their church is obviously more difficult than with Protestant religions because their beliefs are so very different on even the most basic things like who God is, who Jesus is, how we got here, what heaven is, and the list goes on and on.

I have hopes that the part I bolded is slowly changing. esp., when you get away from the Mormon corridor.

And I do think it will continue to slowly change as their young people are more exposed to other people of faith and are less to think in binary ways.

To give you why sense it may change with their young people? BYU-Provo’s campus magazine ‘The Daily Universe’ did a poll with their students.

Majority of them are supporting…SANDERS…

That is a HUGE shift in Mormon thought and it’s in their young people

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

Broad question for Catholics here:

Are you willing to respectful dialogue and work with someone who has different beliefs and culture than you?

Edit: I’m asking with the creedal vs non-creedal culture in mind.

Yes, of course I’m willing. But since you brought up the issue of credalism, I’d counter that it’s not ecumenically helpful when one side is articulating theological perspectives etc., while the other argues from a different angle and neither side ever really speaks to each other’s questions.

 

[Marie5890]

How can anyone really address LDS scholarship? Not a one of the scholars that write about the LDS church have any authority to speak for the church and it’s beliefs as a whole. If the ones who receive revelation for the church do not put forth any “scholarship” on the subject why engage it? For instance where is the scholarship concerning the churches latest revelation about the children of gay couples? The first presidency hasn’t published anything that would let others respond.

And, let’s be honest here for those of us who know. They have actually excommunicated some of their scholars. (google “September six” )

Hopefully it’s changing for LDS scholarship, but there was as time if you were serious about it, and going to do with with integrity, you may very well be risking your membership in the LDS church. Again, I hope that is changing.

 

[jane_doe]

Yes, of course I’m willing. But since you brought up the issue of credalism, I’d counter that it’s not ecumenically helpful when one side is articulating theological perspectives etc., while the other argues from a different angle and neither side ever really speaks to each other’s questions.

If you’re trying to formally unite two faiths via written documents, yes that would be required. But I don’t think that’s what anyone is advocating for.

Instead, I’m advocating for increased mutual appreciation, friendly dialogue, and working alongside each other despite different beliefs. I see this as being very possible between Catholics and Mormons-- though it would require Mormons to acknowledge Catholic creedal-ness, and Catholics to acknowledge Mormon personal faith, and not forcing either one to change.

 

[Marie5890]

Broad question for Catholics here:

Are you willing to respectful dialogue and work with someone who has different beliefs and culture than you?

Edit: I’m asking with the creedal vs non-creedal culture in mind.

Absolutely. I do it all the time.
The challenge that I find with Mormons (though again I do see a shift going on, esp., with the young), is that often times they see me as a potential convert.

I think if Mormons shifted from sharing their view of the Gospel with those who actually have an interest from what it has been, sharing it with even people are are not interested.

Again, I do see a generational shift happening. I have an acquaintanceship with a gentleman who is in his 70’s. He is LDS. We can’t have a conversation without him trying to prove to me the so-called great apostasy and bearing his testimony.

OY Vey!. He is a good man, but it’s his default position.

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

If you’re trying to formally unite two faiths via written documents, yes that would be required. But I don’t think that’s what anyone is advocating for.

Instead, I’m advocating for increased mutual appreciation, friendly dialogue, and working alongside each other despite different beliefs. I see this as being very possible between Catholics and Mormons-- though it would require Mormons to acknowledge Catholic creedal-ness, and Catholics to acknowledge Mormon personal faith, and not forcing either one to change.

I think that works for all humans; we tend to do better when we work together for the betterment of the world. As far as cooperation in social matters go, I’d say there’s no problems there for each of our groups.

 

[Marie5890]

If you’re trying to formally unite two faiths via written documents, yes that would be required. But I don’t think that’s what anyone is advocating for.

Instead, I’m advocating for increased mutual appreciation, friendly dialogue, and working alongside each other despite different beliefs. I see this as being very possible between Catholics and Mormons-- though it would require Mormons to acknowledge Catholic creedal-ness, and Catholics to acknowledge Mormon personal faith, and not forcing either one to change.

I agree with you so very completely on the bold.
Yes, it is possible. And I do see that as happening as the older generations pass on, and the younger generations come up.

 

[adamhovey1988]

I inherited from my Lutheran father (God rest his soul) his argumentative spirit. When I was young, we regularly had Mormons visit our house. Dad was always polite, even when he told Mormons they were wrong. I think doing this kind of dialogue is great. But, do remember however, that doing this over the Internet has its disadvantages. With regards to Mormon and Catholic leaders dialoguing that is up to them. I am unsure if I have ever been to a Mormon meeting-house (though I think I have). I do remember reading the Book of Mormon in a doctor’s office when I was very young. I also (lying around somewhere) have several copies of the Book of Mormon. I would just like to say to the Mormons I think the Book of Mormon is where you are going to have trouble finding common ground with traditional Christians, since we do not accept it as scripture. I would like to ask Mormons: What do you believe that is DIFFERENT than Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants?

 

[jane_doe]

I agree with you so very completely on the bold.
Yes, it is possible. And I do see that as happening as the older generations pass on, and the younger generations come up.

Tis best for all of us to move forward with charity!

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

I would like to ask Mormons: What do you believe that is DIFFERENT than Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants?

I think that’s an issue for a different thread. Let’s stick to the OP as best as possible. I’d encourage any LDS who want to respond to Adam’s question to do so on a different thread.

 

[jane_doe]

I would just like to say to the Mormons I think the Book of Mormon is where you are going to have trouble finding common ground with traditional Christians, since we do not accept it as scripture. I would like to ask Mormons: What do you believe that is DIFFERENT than Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants?

That’s not the OP question.

The question is: are you willing to respect, dialogue, and work shoulder-to-shoulder with someone who is different than you?