Either Catholics or Mormons have it right...

  • Thread starter Thread starter SalesianSDB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m a strong Catholic who loves researching other religions to learn about them, and recently I’ve been researching Mormonism just for fun. I think it’s interesting once you get into all the different denominations and what not, but I digress.

I found this on YouTube and thought it was interesting

This is from an account of Orson F. Whitney, who was an Apostle for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:
"Many years ago a learned man, a member of the Roman Catholic Church, came to Utah and spoke from the stand of the Salt Lake Tabernacle. I became well-acquanted with him, and we conversed freely and frankly. A great scholar, with perhaps a dozen languages at his tongue’s end, he seemed to know all about theology, law, literature, science and philosophy. One day he said to me: 'You Mormons are all ignoramuses. You don’t even know the strength of your own position. It is so strong that there is only one other tenable in the whole Christian world, and that is the position of the Catholic Church. The issue is between Catholicism and Mormonism. If we are right, your are wrong; if you are right, we are wrong; and that’s all there is to it. The Protestants haven’t a leg to stand on. For, if we are wrong, they are wrong with us, since they were a part of us and went out from us; while if we are right, they are apostates whom we cut off long ago. If we have apostolic succession from St. Peter, as we claim, there is no need of Joseph Smith and Mormonism; but if we have not that succession, then such a man as Joseph Smith was necessary, and Mormonism’s attitude is the only consistent one. It is either the perpetuation of the gospel from ancient times, or the restoration of the gospel in latter days."

Here’s the link to the video: youtube.com/watch?v=vktEaSevdfE
The video is the same as above, but with nice music in the background.

I thought it was an interesting point. I would like to know what you guys here thought.

Though if I were a betting man, I’d put my money on the Catholic Church.
I don’t think it’s correct to say Catholics are right OR Mormons are right. I think it is more accurate to say that Mormonism and Catholicism cannot both be right. It is certainly logically possible that both positions are wrong, but it is logically impossible for both positions to be right, because Mormonism is premised upon a total apostacy of the early Church. The doctrinal dispute between Catholicism and Protestantism and/or Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox churches allows for a more flexible position. From the Orthodox position, Catholics may be 99% correct, but err only on the issue of the Pope’s role in the Magesterial authority of the Church. Similarly, Protestants may conclude the Catholic Church is correct on 90% of the “essentials” but adds “extra” doctrine - again, leaving much more room for discussion and/or reconciliation. There is no “middle ground” when it comes to Mormonism and Catholicism. Both cannot be correct.

Peace,
Robert
 
“Either Catholics or Mormons have it right . . .” is a false statement. It implies that either Catholicism or Mormonism is the true religion. If you believe a guy named Joseph Smith – who claimed he could find buried treasure by looking through magic peep stones in his hat, resulting in his conviction for fraud in a New York court in 1826 – you have my deepest sympathy. Comparing Mormonism, born in New York in the U.S.A., to the True Church founded by Jesus Christ in A.D. 33 in Jerusalem is an insult.

In 1830, this same con man founded the Latter Day Saints church, and claimed to have found “golden plates” written in “Reformed Egyptian” – a language unknown to science to this day – that told the story of inhabitants of the United States beginning in 600 B.C. Only Joseph Smith could read these golden plates – with the aid of magic peep stones called Urim and Thummim – and if anyone else dared to look at the plates, God would strike them dead. The story continues . . . it’s an interesting story, if you like fiction. Neither archaeology, nor genetics, nor linguistics, nor prehistory, nor history, nor logic, nor any other evidence supports it.

Jim Dandy
This all actually made me chuckle. 🙂 😃 :rotfl: 😛
 
JeanMichel - I agree that pointing fingers and accusing others of sin is not right. However, that is exactly what the Mormons do when they claim the first Christians were apostates. It is not right all the way around.

And let’s face it, we don’t even have to focus on the “lifestyle” of Joseph Smith - just his words - to show that he taught that all other churches were wrong and that not even Jesus could keep a church together. Really, what he did in private pales in comparison to those words.

Remember, even Jesus spoke up for the Truth. He was humble but he did not allow for a false teaching to go unchallenged. He calls us to do the same.

btw - St. Augustine confessed his sinful ways and converted to the life that Jesus had set up before him. He did not seek to change the Church or demand that it relax its standards for him. That is the beauty of the Catholic Church - it is, and always has been - for sinners.🙂
It seems that there are more than one attacking Smith on anything but his actions in this thread. More importantly, the tread has nothing to do with Smith personally, but the doctrines of the Mormon church. They tell a completely different story than all of Protestantism. More importantly, they make it clear that all Protestantism has no authoritative leg to stand on. They all began in heresy; the heresy of assuming that man may speak for God without declaring revelation. All these churches came from men saying they saw something wrong; not that God told them to start a new church.

Mormons, without realizing it, provide one of the best arguments against this form of heresey than all the outside theologians combined. They speak it cleanly and without ambiguity. It is a good argument they provide the Catholic Church. I recommend we take it and run with…at least the part that focuses on the CC.

My point is that the CC does not need to attack anyone’s sinful ways; our job is to state truth. As we state truth the Holy Spirit will do the rest. In doing so, we are the voice of love, patience, faith, and charity towards all.
 
It seems that there are more than one attacking Smith on anything but his actions in this thread. More importantly, the tread has nothing to do with Smith personally, but the doctrines of the Mormon church. They tell a completely different story than all of Protestantism. More importantly, they make it clear that all Protestantism has no authoritative leg to stand on. They all began in heresy; the heresy of assuming that man may speak for God without declaring revelation. All these churches came from men saying they saw something wrong; not that God told them to start a new church.

Mormons, without realizing it, provide one of the best arguments against this form of heresy than all the outside theologians combined. They speak it cleanly and without ambiguity. It is a good argument they provide the Catholic Church. I recommend we take it and run with…at least the part that focuses on the CC.

My point is that the CC does not need to attack anyone’s sinful ways; our job is to state truth. As we state truth the Holy Spirit will do the rest. In doing so, we are the voice of love, patience, faith, and charity towards all.
Absolutely ! The Holy Spirit has worked through people for aprox.2000yrs. fighting heresies: andSt. Peter certainly had something to say about heresies.

2 Peter 1​

20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,

2 Peter 2​

1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
2 And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled.

God Bless
:coffee:
 
It seems that there are more than one attacking Smith on anything but his actions in this thread. More importantly, the tread has nothing to do with Smith personally, but the doctrines of the Mormon church. They tell a completely different story than all of Protestantism. More importantly, they make it clear that all Protestantism has no authoritative leg to stand on. They all began in heresy; the heresy of assuming that man may speak for God without declaring revelation. All these churches came from men saying they saw something wrong; not that God told them to start a new church.

Mormons, without realizing it, provide one of the best arguments against this form of heresey than all the outside theologians combined. They speak it cleanly and without ambiguity. It is a good argument they provide the Catholic Church. I recommend we take it and run with…at least the part that focuses on the CC.

My point is that the CC does not need to attack anyone’s sinful ways; our job is to state truth. As we state truth the Holy Spirit will do the rest. In doing so, we are the voice of love, patience, faith, and charity towards all.
Part of the stating the truth is to alert unsuspecting people about false prophets. It is important to know what the bible says about false prophets so that we can all know what one is like.
We are here to instruct each other about such matters so that we can be ready to speak up when the matter arises.
 
Hi,

actually it depends of WHICH Protestant denomination we are talking about:

I agree: Lutherans (and maybe also the Reformed Churches) are talking about restoring the Catholic Church.

BUT: Just recently our Baptist Pastor said (on 31th Octobre which is the Reformation Day) that Luther restored Early Christianity /by reading the Holy Bible/ and that the Catholic Church has gone wrong some time ago.
So also Baptists (and maybe also other Churches with Credo-Baptism) believe just as the Mormons do that the Reformation (not only Luther!) has restored Early Christianity.
After starting to read the Holy Bible btw., I also found that out for myself that Protestantism is quite right in quite a lot of points concerning theology.

Esdra
The problem with your conclusion is that the Bible came out of the Catholic Church; the Church did not come out of the Bible. The New Testament is a collection of 27 of the Church’s own writings. She formed the Bible at the close of the fourth century. Those writings that did not conform to Catholic teaching were excluded from the NT. Ipso facto, if your (or your organization’s) interpretation does not agree with the Catholic Church, it’s the wrong interpretation.

You and your Baptist pastor apparently don’t believe Christ when He said He would be with His Apostles ALWAYS (Mt 28:20). And you both apparently believe the Holy Spirit failed to do His assigned job of guiding the Church ALWAYS (Jn 14:16-18, 14-26, 15-26, 16:7-15, Acts 1:1, 15:28 et al.).

Mormonism and Protestantism both make Christ a prevaricator who was unable to preserve His Church. They both claim that the gates of hell (KJV) or the powers of death (RSV) did, in fact, prevail against Christ’s Church, in spite of Christ’s promise that it would not fail (Mt 16:18-19).

Christianity stands or falls on the words of Christ.

Jim Dandy
ex-Southern Baptist, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic!
 
The problem with your conclusion is that the Bible came out of the Catholic Church; the Church did not come out of the Bible. The New Testament is a collection of 27 of the Church’s own writings. She formed the Bible at the close of the fourth century. Those writings that did not conform to Catholic teaching were excluded from the NT. Ipso facto, if your (or your organization’s) interpretation does not agree with the Catholic Church, it’s the wrong interpretation.
Oh come on, I have heard this statement so often!
The Holy Bible is not from the “Catholic Church, the one and only church” as you (not only you but other Catholics here also) keep claiming, but from the Early Christians. I have said that over and over again: The Early Christians and the Catholic Church as we know it now is NOT THE SAME!
I do agree with the Mormons in this case: there was some time a great apostasy, 'though I don’t know when exactly… Maybe somewhere in the Middle-Ages.
Where the Mormons and I (and the Baptists and all other “Reborns”) differ is who restored Early Christianity: Luther (and the other Reformators) vs. Joseph Smith Jr.
You and your Baptist pastor apparently don’t believe Christ when He said He would be with His Apostles ALWAYS (Mt 28:20). And you both apparently believe the Holy Spirit failed to do His assigned job of guiding the Church ALWAYS (Jn 14:16-18, 14-26, 15-26, 16:7-15, Acts 1:1, 15:28 et al.).
The apostles were simply the “first Christians” if you want so. So, yes indeed, Christ is and was and always will be with them. I see the Apostles as a sort of modern Evangelists. I am currently reading 1 Corinthians and here Paul states that pretty well (cf. 1 Cor 3+4).
Mormonism and Protestantism both make Christ a prevaricator who was unable to preserve His Church. They both claim that the gates of hell (KJV) or the powers of death (RSV) did, in fact, prevail against Christ’s Church, in spite of Christ’s promise that it would not fail (Mt 16:18-19).
I can’t speak for Mormons, as I know too less about them (although I am currently also reading the BoM and the RLDS D&C), maybe Zerinus will answer you.

But for Protestants (first and foremost for the Reborns): nobody thinks that Christ is a prevaricator. Christ IS with His Church which is the community of all believers in Him which consists out of those who accepted Jesus as their saviour (and interestingly enough I have recently found out that even some Catholics are “Reborns” - for example in the Charismatic Renewal!).
And also the gates of hell did not prevail against Christ’s Church. Do you really think that Christ or god are so picky that they only accept ONE particular Church (btw. this also is valid for the Mormons!) when there are so many other Christians who believe in His son; consider for example also John 6:35; John 7:38; John 11:25-26 ; John 12:44 ; John 12:46 ; John 14:12)
Christianity stands or falls on the words of Christ.
Amen, brother. 🙂 I can agree on that. 😉
Jim Dandy
ex-Southern Baptist, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic!
In Christ,
Esdra
ex-Catholic, (European) Baptist [which are a little bit different than American Baptists]
 
Oh come on, I have heard this statement so often!
The Holy Bible is not from the “Catholic Church, the one and only church” as you (not only you but other Catholics here also) keep claiming, but from the Early Christians. I have said that over and over again: The Early Christians and the Catholic Church as we know it now is NOT THE SAME!
I do agree with the Mormons in this case: there was some time a great apostasy, 'though I don’t know when exactly… Maybe somewhere in the Middle-Ages.
Where the Mormons and I (and the Baptists and all other “Reborns”) differ is who restored Early Christianity: Luther (and the other Reformators) vs. Joseph Smith Jr.
Hi Esdra, Its funny how apostacy of the Catholic Church is always brought up, but never at a real point in history,only supposition ! Have any in the anti-catholic world; and I mean those who have bought into fables, such as Constantine ! the reformation reforming things !Which it did not ! It only made things absolutely worse,so many splits ! But alas ! As God works in mysterious ways HE allowed these happings for His purpose, He said he would be with His Church always and as always meant it.

quote=onenow1 #2 The bible is from the Catholic Church ! There were no extant writings when the monks of the Catholic Church, copied, copies of the scriptures.

#3 Paul also refers to Christianity as a religion in his first letter to Timothy: “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory” (1 Tim. 3:16).

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of stress. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, inhuman, implacable, slanderers, profligates, fierce, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding the form of religion but denying the power of it. (2 Tim. 3:1-5)

Devout Catholics understand John 6: 52-56.

God Bless
:coffeeread:

Most of us learn through trial and error, what an awsome God we have !
 
Read the book of Mormon, it’s absolutely hilarious! There should be a religious fiction/humor section at every book store and the crowing achievement in this genre is and shall ever be the “Book of Mormon”. It’s so over the top and wacky at times you will be in fit’s of laughter. 😃 People take it seriously but how they could, I have no idea? 🤷 This is a book written by a man that claimed things like the Garden of Eden was in Missouri (funny stuff yes, but it would have been better if Joesph Smith claimed it to be in Branson Missouri… maybe Andy Williams could have sang Moon River form Adam and Eve) I could go on and on but don’t take my word for it, research the Mormon cult… err I mean religion on your own and laughter will soon ensue.
 
Any Person that actually eats the literal flesh of Christ and drinks the literal blood of Christ and recognizes it as such is part of Gods Church whether they like it or not. The rest are his Enemies… and they starve!
AG, maybe instead of spending all your time and energy ‘eating HIS flesh’ you should spend more time reading HIS WORD.
 
Oh come on, I have heard this statement so often!
The Holy Bible is not from the “Catholic Church, the one and only church” as you (not only you but other Catholics here also) keep claiming, but from the Early Christians. I have said that over and over again: The Early Christians and the Catholic Church as we know it now is NOT THE SAME!

Hi Esdra - Yes, the Holy Bible was compiled by Catholics. And, St. Jerome was the first translator.
According to the Didache, the early Church is very much the same as the Catholic Church today!

The apostles were simply the “first Christians” if you want so. So, yes indeed, Christ is and was and always will be with them. I see the Apostles as a sort of modern Evangelists. I am currently reading 1 Corinthians and here Paul states that pretty well (cf. 1 Cor 3+4).

Yes, the apostles were the first Christians, meaning they were following Christ. However, as the Church began to take shape as a whole, it was referred to as Catholic.

Ignatius of Antioch

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains . Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 **A.D. ****110]). **

The Martyrdom of Polycarp

“And of the elect, he was one indeed, the wonderful martyr Polycarp, who in our days was an apostolic and prophetic teacher, bishop of the **Catholic Church **in Smyrna. For every word which came forth from his mouth was fulfilled and will be fulfilled” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 16:2 **A.D. 155]). **

Tertullian

“Where was [the heretic] Marcion, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago—in the reign of Antonius for the most part—and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherius, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 30 **[A.D. 200]). **

Cyprian of Carthage

“They alone have remained outside [the Church] who, were they within, would have to be ejected.
. . . There [in John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest, and the flock clinging to their shepherd in the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishops; and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priest of God, believing that they are secretly in communion with certain individuals. For the Church,** which is one and catholic**, is not split or divided, but is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere to one another” (Letters 66[67]:8 **[A.D. 253]). **

Council of Nicaea I

“But those who say: ‘There was [a time] when he [the Son] was not,’ and ‘before he was born, he was not,’ and ‘because he was made from non-existing matter, he is either of another substance or essence,’ and those who call ‘God the Son of God changeable and mutable,’ these the** Catholic Church **anathematizes” (Appendix to the Creed of Nicaea A.D. 325]).

“Concerning the Paulianists who take refuge with the Catholic Church, a decree has been published that they should be fully baptized. If, however, any of these in times past have been in the clerical order, if indeed they have appeared spotless and above reproach, after being baptized, let them be ordained by the bishop of the Catholic Church” (Canon 9).

Cyril of Jerusalem

“[The Church] is called catholic, then, because it extends over the whole world, from end to end of the earth, and because it teaches universally and infallibly each and every doctrine which must come to the knowledge of men, concerning things visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly, and because it brings every race of men into subjection to godliness, governors and governed, learned and unlearned, and because it universally treats and heals every class of sins, those committed with the soul and those with the body, and it possesses within itself every conceivable form of virtue, in deeds and in words and in the spiritual gifts of every description” (Catechetical Lectures 18:23 **[A.D. 350]). **
“And if you ever are visiting in cities, do not inquire simply where the house of the Lord is—for the others, sects of the impious, attempt to call their dens ‘houses of the Lord’—nor ask merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the name peculiar to this holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God” (ibid., 18:26).

And also the gates of hell did not prevail against Christ’s Church.

Amen!

Do you really think that Christ or god are so picky that they only accept ONE particular Church

I hear what you are saying, but it is clear that Jesus Christ established ONE church.
 
Hi Esdra, Its funny how apostacy of the Catholic Church is always brought up, but never at a real point in history,only supposition ! Have any in the anti-catholic world; and I mean those who have bought into fables, such as Constantine ! the reformation reforming things !Which it did not ! It only made things absolutely worse,so many splits ! But alas ! As God works in mysterious ways HE allowed these happings for His purpose, He said he would be with His Church always and as always meant it.
Well, I simply think that it isn’t possible to give an exact date or a year when the “Great Apostasy” started.
But I am sure that it happened, otherwise our dear Brother Martin Luther wouldn’t have seen need to reform the Church! Let’s mention the indulges i.e., or that it was so to speak “forbidden” to read the Holy Bible (which was only in Latin who noone understood anyway!). People was told that they can’t understand the message of the Bible anyway (despite the fact that it was in Latin who noone understood!). - But the Holy Bible is so simple and precious and true - even Martin Luther found that out (I know i.e. a story where he read in the first Chapter of Romans that we are only, undeserved saved by Grace, not by works [although works are nevertheless important; but because you do them you don’t get to heaven (you can’t deserve heaven!), only through the marvellous grace of God who has sent his only begotten son to redeem us!].

I mean, what Luther did was acutally good, also for the Catholic Church: Many reforms Luther has invented where overtaken by the CC somewhen after the 17th century, like holding masses not in Latin (who noone understood anyway, except the eduacated and the priests themselves), or allowing to consecrate males to decons etc.

And for the splits: there is only ONE God (in three persons), one Baptism, and one Church (e pluribus unum). I don’t see a split, do you?

Esdra
 
"Esdra:
Oh come on, I have heard this statement so often!
The Holy Bible is not from the “Catholic Church, the one and only church” as you (not only you but other Catholics here also) keep claiming, but from the Early Christians. I have said that over and over again: The Early Christians and the Catholic Church as we know it now is NOT THE SAME!
Hi Esdra - Yes, the Holy Bible was compiled by Catholics. And, St. Jerome was the first translator.
According to the Didache, the early Church is very much the same as the Catholic Church today!
Yes, you can say that, BUT there’s a severe terminology error! The modern Roman Catholic Church ISN’T the same than the Catholic Church 2000 years ago!
"Esdra:
The apostles were simply the “first Christians” if you want so. So, yes indeed, Christ is and was and always will be with them. I see the Apostles as a sort of modern Evangelists. I am currently reading 1 Corinthians and here Paul states that pretty well (cf. 1 Cor 3+4).
Yes, the apostles were the first Christians, meaning they were following Christ. However, as the Church began to take shape as a whole, it was referred to as Catholic.
Yes, because Catholic simply means all-embracing (I hope this is the right term in this context!). The term only got destinctive after the Reformation in the 17th century. Before no destinction was needed…

…]
"Esdra:
And also the gates of hell did not prevail against Christ’s Church.
"Esdra:
Do you really think that Christ or god are so picky that they only accept ONE particular Church
I hear what you are saying, but it is clear that Jesus Christ established ONE church.
He did yes, - the community of ALL believers. ALL who believe in Jesus and have entrusted Him his life! Who fully understand what it means for us people that Jesus died for us on the Cross.
This Church is so diverse - so huge. Imagine: From Catholics over Orthodox to Evangelicals - ALL these are the ONE, holy, apostolic and true Church. 🙂

In Christ,
Esdra
 
AG, maybe instead of spending all your time and energy ‘eating HIS flesh’ you should spend more time reading HIS WORD.
An Amen from me from all of my heart. 😉
We ONLY can get to know Jesus and God’s will for our lives better by reading His Word!

In Christ,
Esdra
 
AG, maybe instead of spending all your time and energy ‘eating HIS flesh’ you should spend more time reading HIS WORD.
Jesus is the WORD OF GOD.

Beyond that, this comment is nothing but a cheap shot. Any Catholic who seeks to be a disciple of Christ does so through prayer, fasting, charity and a scripture study.

The Sacraments are gifts from God, not something extraneous to Him.
 
Just to be sure I understand this correctly:

Your Pastor said this?
BUT: Just recently our Baptist Pastor said (on 31th Octobre which is the Reformation Day) that Luther restored Early Christianity /by reading the Holy Bible/ and that the Catholic Church has gone wrong some time ago.
So also Baptists (and maybe also other Churches with Credo-Baptism) believe just as the Mormons do that the Reformation (not only Luther!) has restored Early Christianity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top