Former Mormon "de-conversion" stories

  • Thread starter Thread starter sablouwho
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
why_me said:
Sidebar: I do believe that many of the European converts to mormonism were luthern and anglican if I am not mistaken and if so, the influence of the cross within early mormon converts.
Click to expand...
Provide the statistics, and then we will talk.
 
Mike_Reed said:
My thesis was US centered because early Mormonism was US centered.
Click to expand...
But you overlook the protestant converts from Europe which were many. The protestants in america were a bigoted group. They hated difference, especially on the frontier. Thus, their hatred of mormonism. In the east, they hated the catholic church because the new immigrants were basically catholic and were looked upon as inferior.

What is sad on the mormon threads is the lack of understanding of the early mormons who saw their homes and churches burned, forgetting that the same was happening to some east coast catholic churches.

But I suppose that since of the catholic posters have no problem with the burnings of mormon property, we should show no sympathy for the destruction of catholic churches. But, unlike some of the catholic posters, I do have sympathy for the catholics at that time who received bigotry from the protestants. In fact, even the Nauvoo Expositor had some anticatholic words in it.
 
why_me said:
But you overlook the protestant converts from Europe which were many. The protestants in america were a bigoted group. They hated difference, especially on the frontier. Thus, there hatred of mormonism. In the east, they hated the catholic church because the new immigrants were basically catholic and were looked upon as inferior.
Click to expand...
Provide the statistics showing that there was a significant number of Lutheran converts.
 
Is saying that Christianity feel into darkness, lost its priesthood soon after Jesus established it and that it has groped in darkness for 17 hundred years until Joseph Smith restored it, is this anti Christian? The whole Mormon faith in a clear sense is an anti Christian website. So bringing up the anti Mormon sites does not sit well with me. We all know there is evil in the world, nothing new.

As to the lack of a Cross or Crucifix in the Mormon faith, it is anti Catholicism, and it was a gigantic mistake on the part of the LDS Leaders to remove it as a symbol of faith. How do I knoe this? 11 years of helping with the RCIA in Logan Utah. When they come to understand why we have it as the greatest of Christian symbols they become Catholic. The message of the Cross is clear, you just have to hear it, try to understand it, and then admit it into your soul.

You can talk and make your talk sound good, but truth is always truth. The LDS do not focus, deeply meditate on the suffering Christ, His Passion. When they say they do they are speaking as a Catholic in order to be accepted. Its deception, innocent sometimes. I think of a chameleon.

You cannot forget the deception that took place in the Garden of Eden. Mormons have always taught that the atonement took place in the Garden of Geseme in order to be different than Christians. Another mistake as the Scriptures would never support this. Jesus came to die with the sins of the world in Him, to put them to death. The Cross is where this took place, who would want you to think otherwise? Why? The Cross is where Satan was defeated. Yes we are still in the game but we do know the final score.

As to wearing the Cross in Utah. My son quit wearing it to school, that’s all I need to say. I get looks all the time myself. Never ashamed to wear it, it’s the symbol of my life in Christ. The Cross also represents the Tree of Life.

Is it not a fact that when a Protestant looks at the empty cross they see Jesus on it?

We as Catholics are in Lent currently. The Holy days fast approaching. The suffering Christ is well into our minds, into our mindset. I am going on my 11th year as a Catholic and I will guarantee you this …Why Me: This will be the best Easter ever, and the next will be even better. But the best to come will be when I lay my own head down for the last time, suffer in Christ and die, knowing that because He died for me I will rise in Him, through Him, for Him. Why me? To be with Him forever

Catholics understand the resurrection, its joy, because we walk with Jesus during His Passion. The depth of what he has done is sired into us. His Birth, His teachings, His passion, death and glorious resurrection is at every single Mass ever said. Just like the Most Holy Trintiy it too is all one in Christ, one not being more important to the other. We live the Crucifixion – Our Sin- we live the resurrection our lives redeemed, sinners made whole again by Christ. We do not strive for perfection, we strive for relationship with him. He takes care of the perfection through us for others. Its always about others.

The Crucifixion on the Cross became a symbol as soon as those who were with him looked towards it, they did not forget what He did, what He said, what He came to do. It invokes so many feelings at Mass. Love, to lay down your life for a friend, victory over satan, forgiveness of our sins, perfect surrender to the Father, mission completed, …anybody want to ad to this?

As to what Jesus looked like the book of Isaiah is probably your best bet. Lowly, not anything to look at. This makes sense to me although our culture wants to tell us otherwise. The washing of His disciples feet fits well here. Only the lowest did this. Jesus placed Himself in the lowest place…Cross

Its not at all about looks or good deeds. Its not of this world.

As to the Commandments you have to read Scripture in thier proper context. Only Jesus can live the Commandments, not one of us can. But if we live in Jesus by our honest Confessions, only because we live in Him. If we could follow the commandments there would be no need for the Cross. Catholics know there is nothing we can do accept surrender our sinful lives up to Him. Honesty!

Each Corpus of Christ is different because it is merely an artist’s rendition, nothing more. Its how it moves you that is important. The argument of idolatry does not work here. We worship One God, and Him alone. First Commadment!
 
Mike_Reed said:
Why do you assume that Catholics here don’t appreciate that?
Click to expand...
I have been here a long time and the majority of catholics who post on the mormon threads have never shown any understanding of mormon persecution and what effect it had on the mormon mindset. Some would even claim that the mormons deserved what they got.
 
why_me said:
norwayheritage.com/articles/templates/voyages.asp?articleid=29&zoneid=6

Mormon missionaries were centered in Britain and scandinavia. And the opposition in Scandinavia was fierce from the luthern church. But one thing that I do know, regardless if they were many luthern converts, luthernism was not just a faith but a cultural focal point and not easily disgarded by the mormon converts.
Click to expand...
You are all over the place, Why Me. How does this undermine my argument that the aversion to the cross had an anti-Catholic basis?

BTW… early Mormons were accepting the symbol of the cross before these missions started having any significant level of success.
 
Mike_Reed said:
You are all over the place, Why Me. How does this undermine my argument that the aversion to the cross has an anti-Catholic basis?

BTW… early Mormons were accepting the symbol of the cross before these missions started having any significant level of success.
Click to expand...
First, you claimed that protestantism rejected the cross. I tried to show that in Europe this was not necessarily the case as exemplified by anglicanism and luthernism. Then you claimed that it had anticatholic understandings in america for the lds church. I claimed that mormon converts were basically protestant before being baptised and this would give them a prejudice bias against the catholic church which carried over into their mormon faith. But I can not say that the early mormons rejected the cross but its disappearance occured over time and if that had something to do with their former protestant background, so be it. But I doubt that it was anticatholic since the catholic church had the crucifix attached to the cross and not an empty cross.

And if many of the mormon converts from europe came from anglican and luthern background, the rejection of the cross had just as much to do with their former protestant backgroud as with catholicism.
 
why_me said:
First, you claimed that protestantism rejected the cross. I tried to show that in Europe this was not necessarily the case as exemplified by anglicanism and luthernism.
Click to expand...
A previous post should have made it clear what I meant by Protestantism. I explicitly stated in post #125 “American Protestantism (generally speaking)”.
I claimed that mormon converts were basically protestant before being baptised and this would give them a prejudice bias against the catholic church which carried over into their mormon faith.
Click to expand...
And I explain in my thesis in detail that early Mormons were largely anti-Catholic from the start. I then noted that, of all the anti-Catholic polemics that early Saints echoed (paralleling popular Protestant criticisms), they avoided criticizing the symbol of the cross. On the contrary, I found several examples of prominent saints embracing/promoting the symbol. The earliest negative quote that can be found is 1877. By this time, the American Protestant mainstream had become accepting of the symbol. When the Saints started rejecting the symbol of the cross around the turn of the 20th century, their claims were overwhelmingly tinged with anti-catholic rhetoric. Why did the shift in targeting the cross happen, if the Saints were anti-Catholic from the start? There were two (out of at least three) early factors (which encouraged the acceptance of the cross) that had lost much of their influence upon the minds of the Saints by the turn of the 20th century. These influences were folkmagic and freemasonry–the third factor that remained (the precolumbian use of the cross validating the authenticity of the Book of Mormon) was not strong enough when a second and third wave of catholic tension hit the state of Utah.

Like I said… you shouldn’t try to debunk my thesis/book without reading it first.

You’ve exausted me, Why Me. I’m done explaining my book/thesis to you. I need to get back to work anyway.

Bye.
 
Mike_Reed said:
A previous post should have made it clear what I meant by Protestantism. I explicitly stated in post #125 “American Protestantism (generally speaking)”.

And I explain in my thesis in detail that early Mormons were largely anti-Catholic from the start. I then noted that, of all the anti-Catholic polemics that early Saints echoed (paralleling popular Protestant criticisms), they avoided criticizing the symbol of the cross. On the contrary, I found several examples of prominent saints embracing/promoting the symbol. The earliest negative quote that can be found is 1877. By this time, the American Protestant mainstream had become accepting of the symbol. When the Saints started rejecting the symbol of the cross around the turn of the 20th century, their claims were overwhelmingly tinged with anti-catholic rhetoric. Why did the shift in targeting the cross happen, if the Saints were anti-Catholic from the start? There were two (out of at least three) early factors (which encouraged the acceptance of the cross) that had lost much of their influence upon the minds of the Saints by the turn of the 20th century. These influences were folkmagic and freemasonry–the third factor that remained (the precolumbian use of the cross validating the authenticity of the Book of Mormon) was not strong enough when a second and third wave of catholic tension hit the state of Utah.

Like I said… you shouldn’t try to debunk my thesis/book without reading it first.

You’ve exausted me, Why Me. I’m done explaining my book/thesis to you. I need to get back to work anyway.

Bye.
Click to expand...
Thanks Mike Reed
I think I have been shunned, so I will follow you

Until a Mormon can come to understand their own part in Christ’s Crucifixion will they be able to understand why we have the empty Cross, and the Crucifix in our homes and in our churches. Without an understanding of the fall of mankind, the Holy Trinity and a true Baptism into true Christianity they will never fully understand these Christian perspectives or worse yet, deny them. These are all solid parts of my own conversion to Christ as my Creator, His life is what sustains us.
“…having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.”
Colossians

God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world."
Galatians 6:14 "

…the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."
1 Corinthians 1:18

“He said to them all, 'If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.”
Luke 9:23 ".

by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross."
Colossians

“…that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.”
Ephesians 2:16 "

And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel…" Col 1:21-23

"Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me.”
Mark
 
why_me said:
First, you claimed that protestantism rejected the cross. I tried to show that in Europe this was not necessarily the case as exemplified by anglicanism and luthernism. Then you claimed that it had anticatholic understandings in america for the lds church. I claimed that mormon converts were basically protestant before being baptised and this would give them a prejudice bias against the catholic church which carried over into their mormon faith. But I can not say that the early mormons rejected the cross but its disappearance occured over time and if that had something to do with their former protestant background, so be it. But I doubt that it was anticatholic since the catholic church had the crucifix attached to the cross and not an empty cross.

And if many of the mormon converts from europe came from anglican and luthern background, the rejection of the cross had just as much to do with their former protestant backgroud as with catholicism.
Click to expand...
whyme- When you say that “the Catholic church had the crucifix attached to the cross,” are you referring to the interior or exterior of the church?

I am trying to remember if I have ever seen a crucifix affixed to the exterior of a Catholic church in the U.S… Now, there might be one in a surrounding courtyard or garden…I would say that on the newer churches there is usually a cross, not crucifix, on the churches. The really old churches, and those in other countries, I’m not so sure.

Perhaps you are referring to the INSIDE of the churches and are referring to the crucifix that appears at the front of the church. Although, I know of one Catholic church that has a “risen Jesus” in front of the church instead of a crucifix.

Also, I was told by one former Mormon (now Catholic) and one Mormon that the first converts from Europe were “uncatechized” protestants. One said that his family in Europe, (that came to the U.S. when offered free passage by the Mormon church that they needed to pay back once they were settled), had a Bible in their home but did not practice a religion.
 
TheosisM said:
I never understood why some Christians don’t like the crucifix.
Click to expand...
Agreed. “For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God… Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”
why_me said:
Most crucifixes have christ with white skin looking rather european.
Click to expand...
Only in places where the majority of people of are of European descent. Among Catholics in Africa and Asia, most crucifixes and crucifixion images depict Christ with African or Asian features.

Personally, I love this Congo corpus.
 
TheosisM said:
I never understood why some Christians don’t like the crucifix.
Click to expand...
I agree with you.

Remember when the movie “The Passion of The Christ” came out? Do you remember how many people were upset about it because it was violent and graphic?

I was like Hello!?!?, What part of “scourged” (beaten) and “nailed to a cross” should be portrayed as kittens and rainbows?

I have a saying that I like to use regarding a crucifix vs a cross.

The Cross by itself did nothing. What Christ did on that cross is everything.
 
lax16 said:
whyme- When you say that “the Catholic church had the** crucifix attached to the cross**,” are you referring to the interior or exterior of the church?
Click to expand...
Maybe instead of crucifix he really means corpus?
 
why_me said:
We recently held an open house in the Arizona Temple. Following a complete renovation of that building, nearly a quarter of a million people saw its beautiful interior. On the first day of the opening, clergymen of other religions were invited as special guests, and hundreds responded. It was my privilege to speak to them and to answer their questions at the conclusion of their tours. I told them that we would be pleased to answer any queries they might have. Many were asked. Among these was one which came from a Protestant minister.

Said he: “I’ve been all through this building, this temple which carries on its face the name of Jesus Christ, but nowhere have I seen any representation of the cross, the symbol of Christianity. I have noted your buildings elsewhere and likewise find an absence of the cross. Why is this when you say you believe in Jesus Christ?”

I responded: “I do not wish to give offense to any of my Christian brethren who use the cross on the steeples of their cathedrals and at the altars of their chapels, who wear it on their vestments, and imprint it on their books and other literature. But for us, the cross is the symbol of the dying Christ, while our message is a declaration of the living Christ.”

He then asked: “If you do not use the cross, what is the symbol of your religion?”

I replied that the lives of our people must become the only meaningful expression of our faith and, in fact, therefore, the symbol of our worship.

I hope he did not feel that I was smug or self-righteous in my response. He was correct in his observation that we do not use the cross, except as our military chaplains use it on their uniforms for identification. Our position at first glance may seem a contradiction of our profession that Jesus Christ is the key figure of our faith. The official name of the church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We worship him as Lord and Savior. The Bible is our scripture. We believe that the prophets of the Old Testament who foretold the coming of the Messiah spoke under divine inspiration. We glory in the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, setting forth the events of the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of the Son of God, the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh. Like Paul of old, we are “not ashamed of the gospel of [Jesus] Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation.” (Rom. 1:16.) And like Peter, we affirm that Jesus Christ is the only name “given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (See Acts 4: 12.)

lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/holidays/easter/symbol_christ.html
Click to expand...
 
zaffiroborant said:
Maybe instead of crucifix he really means corpus?
Click to expand...
Yes, that is what I mean. Also, in Europe, I do believe that the corpus would be connected to the cross outside the church, at times connected to the outside walls of the church.
 
Mike_Reed said:
Like I said… you shouldn’t try to debunk my thesis/book without reading it first.

You’ve exausted me, Why Me. I’m done explaining my book/thesis to you. I need to get back to work anyway.

Bye.
Click to expand...
Lets see what the MADites will say about it. It is difficult to discuss it on a forum. Maybe there will be a Maxwell paper on it or a FARMS paper on your thesis. Lets hope so. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top