Former Mormons Get A Hobby

[RC_Matt]

I even gave the first reading at the last Mass. I have stated that the book of mormon has not been proven false. And that is a truth. Nothing to confess about that. i also have an open mind about JS based on my own testimonial experience of praying about the book of mormon when I was 18 years old.

YOU stood as a Lector at Mass in a Catholic Church???!!! Do you even know what a “Lector” is? A Lector is a position of honor, not just a reader; a Lector is a teacher, a participant in leading the Mass, one whose responsibility is to assist the Priest in teaching the Scripture/Gospel at Mass.

Does your Parish Priest know that you actively promote and defend the false and heretical teachings of Mormonsim on a CATHOLIC board? Does he know that you actively obfuscate the full truth behind Mormon teachings? Does he know that you encourage people from Mormon boards to come here and do the same? Does he know that you encourage Catholics to meet with Mormon missionaries? Does he know that you have a testimony of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon?

You may be a very nice person, and I’m sure you are. That said, your behavior was absolutely scandalous, sacrilegious and profane. It’s one thing to come to this board and do what you do, it is quite another thing to desecrate the Mass. You made a mockery of that Mass and blatantly disrespected the Church, the Parish, the Priest, the other participants and the entire body assembled. It totally blows me away that anybody with any sense of propriety at all would have the gall to pull a stunt like that. Please don’t EVER do that again.

By the way, albeit for a different reason, I’m sure your stake president, bishop and ward would be every bit as incensed as I am over your performance.

 

[PattyPryor]

Why Me,

You worry me a bit…

That said. Does your LDS faith still concider you an active priesthood holder in your family?

ALSO shame on you! Saying a reading at mass. You can say your Catholic all you want but to me you walk in Mormon shoes yet

 

[Elric]

I even gave the first reading at the last Mass. I have stated that the book of mormon has not been proven false. And that is a truth. Nothing to confess about that. i also have an open mind about JS based on my own testimonial experience of praying about the book of mormon when I was 18 years old.

You have stated that the BoM has not been proven false, that doesnt mean that your statement is true.

Unfortunatly for you, the BoM has been proven false by yourself and other mormans like zerinus who have visited this website. Simply because you cant answer some basic and important questions about it.

If it is true and actually is what presented as, why all the changes?

Why on earth would you change the Divine word of God?

Why suggest that Moroni didnt do its/his job properly and that God is not only falliable, but also so incompetent that He cant inspire someone to spell properly much less translate the gold plates?

Thats without looking at the questionable history of Mr Smith or the LSD church.

Its not anti-mormon, its simply asking important questions about the basis of the LDS faith/church. They are certainly things that I would want to know before I chose to enter the mormon church.

Finally its not the usual cathloic attack, because I am not cathloic.

So if th BoM hasnt been proven false, then you should have no problem answering these questions. Yet you and others always avoid them.

 

[xmormon]

I even gave the first reading at the last Mass. I have stated that the book of mormon has not been proven false. And that is a truth. Nothing to confess about that. i also have an open mind about JS based on my own testimonial experience of praying about the book of mormon when I was 18 years old.

When you say the Book of Mormon has not been proven false you only show you haven’t studied enough yet. Many experts have weighed in showing the Book of Mormon fails the DNA test (see Book of Mormon DNA numerous sites), The archaeological test (see archaeological evidence of the Book of Mormon numerous sites). There is a book called 1001 changes in the Book of Mormon it lists numerous changes made by the church since the first printing of the Book of Mormon. Chief among these changes is the numerous times the phrase “Jesus Christ is the everlasting Father” to Jesus Christ is the ‘son of’ the everlasting Father. Joseph Smith completely changed his belief on the nature of God after the first printing of the Book of Mormon. I would be happy to provide exact references and many other evidences of the fraud of the Book of Mormon ask and you shall receive. As for
your testimony if a usher at a Spielberg movie told you that during the movie you will have an emotional feeling then you will know Spielberg is God’s prophet and the movie is God’s word would you believe it? Mormons use the oldest con artist trick in the book (trust your emotions not the facts) If you read the book of Mormon you are often reading exact quotes taken from the King James Bible sometimes spotted here and there and sometimes quoted in entire chapters (again I can provide many examples). Little wonder the book comes off as scripture at first glance. Joseph Smith heavily plagiarized the King James bible and hoped ignorant farm people wouldn’t catch on.

 

[Kristine1957]

Because he is trying to proselytize all us apostates.

It’s not going to work… Once you start asking questions and finding out the “right” answers all of us mormons could never go back to that church.

Why me" I would like to know why you are teaching your children that the LDS church is true but yet your kinda practicing being Catholic? The doctrine is what is important. Are your children confused???

 

[BDawg]

I don’t have any problem with Catholics arguing against Mormonism, or any other system of thought that they disagree with. On the other hand, it bothers me when people (Mormons included) are so intent on arguing their case that they cease to be able to recognize really BAD arguments.

Case in point. I understand that, since Catholics have a particularly strict idea about when a person becomes a person, you have particularly strict views about when abortion is acceptable. I.e., it’s never acceptable. (Except, of course, in a case like an ectopic pregnancy, in which case Catholic moral theologians bend over backwards to make it clear that the operation involved is “removing a diseased fallopian tube,” and this operation has the “unintended consequence” of killing off an embryo. Unintended. Yep.) Anyway, given this point of view, I can understand why Catholics would argue against the Mormon policy on abortion.

So the wording of our policy is less strict. But the fact is that Mormons actively try to discourage abortions, even though we recognize that there might be RARE cases where the issue isn’t so clear. The result? Mormons have a FAR lower abortion rate than Catholics. For example, which state has the lowest abortion rate–about 1/3 the national average? Utah. On the other hand, Catholic women actually get abortions at pretty much exactly the same rate as the general population in the US. Like Wademann said, are we going to niggle about wording, or are we going to look at which policy actually persuades more people not to get abortions?

Honestly, I just can’t believe how often this argument keeps coming up in the new wave of Catholic anti-Mormon literature. I mean, non-Catholics often already have the impression that the RCC is run by a bunch of celibate men who have no clue how to handle family and reproductive issues. Do we need any more proof than this? Your own people can’t even take Catholic policy on these issues seriously. You talk this big, idealistic gas about how you are so purely pro-life and Mormons are actually PRO-abortion, but it’s apparent to anyone who bothers to look up a few statistics that it’s only talk.

BDawg

Source:
Stanley K. Henshaw and Kathryn Kost, “Abortion Patients in 1994-1995: Characteristics and Contraceptive Use”, Family Planning Perspectives, 28(4): 140-147 & 158, July/August 1996. agi-usa.org/pubs/journals/2814096.html.

 

[BDawg]

And in case you were wondering, yes, I was annoyed when I wrote that last post.

I can handle it when you guys start going off on how “DNA has disproved the Book of Mormon.” I’m a PhD scientist. I can read all that literature and see clearly that the issue is not resolved at all, unless you take a particularly narrow reading of the Book of Mormon that hasn’t been current among educated Mormons for several decades. But go ahead and keep strutting around acting as if you actually know anything about how science operates, or anything about population genetics. I’m sure it makes you feel good, but if anyone wants to get the other side of the argument, it only takes a few keystrokes on Google.

I can handle it when you go on about the “scandalous” changes in the Book of Mormon. Of course, I have a reprint of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, and I’ve read it cover-to-cover. I can testify that the changes I noticed were purely cosmetic. There are a COUPLE places where “Eternal Father” was changed to “Son of the Eternal Father,” for instance, but there are a number of other places where Jesus is STILL referred to as the “Eternal Father.” And guess what? Mormons are fine with that. We have a particular way of interpreting that sort of thing that doesn’t involve eternally unchanging substances that are simple in nature (i.e., they have no parts,) and yet include three distinct “persons.” The issue of how the Trinity is “one,” yet “more than one” is a difficult one, and anyone with half a brain can see that merely pointing to passages that speak of one side of the coin or the other is not going to produce a balanced interpretation of anything. (The Catholics long ago condemned the Modalists and Arians for doing exactly that.)

But when you start telling me that I’m pro-abortion just because I only think that 99.9% of the abortions now performed ought to be eliminated, I get a bit peeved. It seems to me that not only are you misinterpreting what I’m all about, but you are doing it willfully, just to score a few rhetorical points.

So how about this? I think that Catholics are really stealth pro-Choicers, because they preach policies on abortion that are so obviously extreme, unrealistic, and inhuman that even most Catholics simply ignore what the Church has to say. It’s reverse psychology, you see. Do you feel like I’m trying hard to understand you and treat your beliefs fairly?

BDawg

 

[PattyPryor]

BDawg,

I was in a room with 100+ mormons one Sunday and I said I would die for my baby. If I was seriously ill during the birthing process I would DIE. i also said if I was raped I would have the baby. 99% of the Mormons in the room thought I was nuts.

let me tell you I WOULD DIE FOR MY BABY. Thier life is sooo much greater than mine. I am THANKFUL for every breathe I take and would be HONORED to die for my baby.

Before you go around saying all catholics or saying Catholics in general you should talk to every Catholic on the face of the planet instead of judging.

We teach PROLIFE Mormons teach PRO Choice. it is in the Mormon church material. This is one of the issues why Isaiah Bennett
left the mormon church

Also did you know i could get pregnet today and say to my doctor I have high anxity because i’m pregenet and some doctors take that as a “health” issue.

 

[RebeccaJ]

For example, which state has the lowest abortion rate–about 1/3 the national average? Utah.

Well then, as you know the statistics you are quoting mean nothing.

In order to make a statistical comparison you would need to poll equal number of mormons as you do Catholics. Randomly, not localized to one state. Or, if you are stuck on the idea of Utah, a random sampling of Utah Catholics and Mormons would suffice.

 

[majick275]

And in case you were wondering, yes, I was annoyed when I wrote that last post.

I can handle it when you guys start going off on how “DNA has disproved the Book of Mormon.” I’m a PhD scientist. I can read all that literature and see clearly that the issue is not resolved at all, unless you take a particularly narrow reading of the Book of Mormon that hasn’t been current among educated Mormons for several decades. But go ahead and keep strutting around acting as if you actually know anything about how science operates, or anything about population genetics. I’m sure it makes you feel good, but if anyone wants to get the other side of the argument, it only takes a few keystrokes on Google.

I can handle it when you go on about the “scandalous” changes in the Book of Mormon. Of course, I have a reprint of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, and I’ve read it cover-to-cover. I can testify that the changes I noticed were purely cosmetic. There are a COUPLE places where “Eternal Father” was changed to “Son of the Eternal Father,” for instance, but there are a number of other places where Jesus is STILL referred to as the “Eternal Father.” And guess what? Mormons are fine with that. We have a particular way of interpreting that sort of thing that doesn’t involve eternally unchanging substances that are simple in nature (i.e., they have no parts,) and yet include three distinct “persons.” The issue of how the Trinity is “one,” yet “more than one” is a difficult one, and anyone with half a brain can see that merely pointing to passages that speak of one side of the coin or the other is not going to produce a balanced interpretation of anything. (The Catholics long ago condemned the Modalists and Arians for doing exactly that.)

But when you start telling me that I’m pro-abortion just because I only think that 99.9% of the abortions now performed ought to be eliminated, I get a bit peeved. It seems to me that not only are you misinterpreting what I’m all about, but you are doing it willfully, just to score a few rhetorical points.

So how about this? I think that Catholics are really stealth pro-Choicers, because they preach policies on abortion that are so obviously extreme, unrealistic, and inhuman that even most Catholics simply ignore what the Church has to say. It’s reverse psychology, you see. Do you feel like I’m trying hard to understand you and treat your beliefs fairly?

BDawg

well since you are a “phd scientist” (whatever that means) I guess we are all wrong and must convert to mormonism or face eternity in hell…

you choose a strange red herring in the DNA subject but okay, what non-LDS accredited scholar has done any peer reviewed work that shows that native americans are descended from israelites? I see you have also chosen to ignore the supposedly “divine” revelations of early LDS prophets and apostles to “rewrite” the BoM as some kind of LGT that was secluded from any other indigenous peoples. narrow reading indeed. (principal ancestors, land kept hidden from all others, millions of warriors, no mention of any common atributes of pre-columbian cultures) what’s your degree in? multilevel marketing? nice rabbit trail on the trinity as well. do you think that will mask the original trinitarian view of JS that is STILL in the BoM? or do you really hope to reconcile theosis with eternal progression?

I’m just wondering which LDS missionary board whyme pulled you off of.

you’re not pro-abortion, you’re pro-choice. you want the right to choose an abortion if/when you deem it necessary. I really don’t care if you treat my beliefs fairly. we have a catechism that makes our doctrine very clear. mormons on the other hand deliberately avoid taking a firm doctrinal stand because it makes it hard to overcome the ridiculous teachings of past “prophets”. (except for mundane things like how many earrings you can wear. GBH was quite clear on that issue.)

 

[majick275]

Well then, as you know the statistics you are quoting mean nothing.

In order to make a statistical comparison you would need to poll equal number of mormons as you do Catholics. Randomly, not localized to one state. Or, if you are stuck on the idea of Utah, a random sampling of Utah Catholics and Mormons would suffice.

don’t forget to adjust for socio-economic factors.

 

[Elric]

And in case you were wondering, yes, I was annoyed when I wrote that last post.

I can handle it when you guys start going off on how “DNA has disproved the Book of Mormon.” I’m a PhD scientist.

In what field?

Apparently people foward this DNA issue are PhD scientists as well.

I can read all that literature and see clearly that the issue is not resolved at all, unless you take a particularly narrow reading of the Book of Mormon that hasn’t been current among educated Mormons for several decades.

Wait what?

Current BoM?

So did/does the BoM say that the Indians are the descendants of the people in the BoM or not?

But go ahead and keep strutting around acting as if you actually know anything about how science operates, or anything about population genetics. I’m sure it makes you feel good, but if anyone wants to get the other side of the argument, it only takes a few keystrokes on Google.

But wasnt it disproved by people who actually know how science operates and know about population genetics?

What is the other side of the argument?

Either the BoM is right/was right or it isnt/wasnt.

I think that perhaps its the writer that didnt understand how science works or about population genetics, he didnt seem to have much of a grasp of archeology either.

I can handle it when you go on about the “scandalous” changes in the Book of Mormon.

Well when you decide to change the divine word of God, isnt that pretty scandelous?

Especally when it is still claimed to be the divine word of God?

Of course, I have a reprint of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, and I’ve read it cover-to-cover. I can testify that the changes I noticed were purely cosmetic. There are a COUPLE places where “Eternal Father” was changed to “Son of the Eternal Father,” for instance, but there are a number of other places where Jesus is STILL referred to as the “Eternal Father.” And guess what? Mormons are fine with that.

Well you have already shown that to be false. Remember you bit about the current BoM?

You cant claim that something is the word of God when you keep changing it, any change no matter how “cosmetic” invalidates it. I dont think that God would be incompent enough to allow any sort of mistakes in it, much less get characters confused so that it is refering to a person who is already dead as someone else.

Your whole belief is based on God being faliable and incompetant, how could anyone be fine with that?

We have a particular way of interpreting that sort of thing that doesn’t involve eternally unchanging substances that are simple in nature (i.e., they have no parts,) and yet include three distinct “persons.” The issue of how the Trinity is “one,” yet “more than one” is a difficult one, and anyone with half a brain can see that merely pointing to passages that speak of one side of the coin or the other is not going to produce a balanced interpretation of anything. (The Catholics long ago condemned the Modalists and Arians for doing exactly that.)

You are speaking a lot but you are not actually saying anything.

Its all “this is false”, “nobody understands this”, “They are wrong” and “Im a PhD scientist” but nothing to support this. You are not showing anything.

 

[BDawg]

BDawg,
We teach PROLIFE Mormons teach PRO Choice. it is in the Mormon church material. This is one of the issues why Isaiah Bennett
left the mormon church

This is what I mean. I think that there are extremely rare cases where an abortion might be the right choice. Extremely rare. And so even though I think the abortion laws in the USA ought to be MUCH more restrictive than they are, and I would vote with good Catholics almost all the time on such issues, I get labeled as “pro-choice,” rather than “pro-life.”

Fair enough, I guess. But then, I guess it’s also fair enough for me to say I think (as your 100+ Mormons did) that you are some kind of unbalanced religious zealot. And not because you said you would die for your baby. Rather, it’s because you want to force every other woman, in whatever circumstance, to make the same choice. Oh, except when it’s an ectopic pregnancy. Then you can have an abortion without “intending” to. Have you ever thought that maybe some of the “pro-Choice” sounding wording in the LDS policy might be there to cover just such extremely unusual circumstances, except that we actually have the guts to call an abortion an abortion?

 

[BDawg]

Well then, as you know the statistics you are quoting mean nothing.

In order to make a statistical comparison you would need to poll equal number of mormons as you do Catholics. Randomly, not localized to one state. Or, if you are stuck on the idea of Utah, a random sampling of Utah Catholics and Mormons would suffice.

The source I cited did poll a good sampling of Catholics, but Mormons were not singled out. However, Utah is about 70% Mormon, and the church activity rates in Utah are similar to those in the rest of the USA. If Catholics have abortions at a rate identical to the national average, and Utahns have abortions at about 1/3 of the national average, I think it is fair to say that you have very little wiggle room here. Even if ALL the abortions in Utah are done on Mormon women (and this is a ridiculous hypothetical,) then that means that the Mormons in Utah have abortions at about 1/2 the national average rate, while Catholics still would be getting abortions at about twice this rate. If you don’t believe me, go ask a statistician. You’re caught.

 

[BDawg]

don’t forget to adjust for socio-economic factors.

You’re right. Mormons tend to be somewhat more educated than Catholics, on average. But the overall rate differences are just too big for socioeconomic factors to overcome.

 

[majick275]

You’re right. Mormons tend to be somewhat more educated than Catholics, on average. But the overall rate differences are just too big for socioeconomic factors to overcome.

that’s a very ethnocentric viewpoint. the Catholic church is universal while the “covenant race” of "white and delightsome " folks living in the “promised land” tends to be a very narrow demographic. a lot more than just education is at play here. (although that is significant as statistically, not only are catholics less educated than mormons but education appears to play a significant role in likeliness to get an abortion according to the studies presented on this thread)

I will say though that it’s a bit arrogant to try and apply localized American studies to a global religion and portray the results as somehow proving that mormons are more pro-life than Catholics.

I think also that you must admit that the truth is that mormons are pro-choice with very strict guidelines on how to exercise said choice. Catholics in your opinion have set the bar impossibly high and thus just give up on trying to comply. I disagree. call me an idealist but I think the bar has to be high and yes many of us will fail often BUT that’s when Jesus picks us up, washes us off and puts us back out there to try again. For many years that was also the position of the LDS. they just seem to be bowing to social pressure again. ( i say again because earlier LDS doctrines that I find extremely wrong were discarded/suspended/etc. at various times)

 

[BDawg]

well since you are a “phd scientist” (whatever that means) I guess we are all wrong and must convert to mormonism or face eternity in hell…

Wow. I thought it would be clear that a PhD scientist is a scientist with a PhD… in a science. I know enough not to reveal a lot of personal info on a forum like this, but since you asked I’ll just say that my PhD is not in population genetics, but it is in a field that required me to study some evolutionary biology (a related subject.) I’m a university professor, and an active researcher with federal grants. So, as I said, I can read the arguments and make my own evaluation of how conclusive they are. And they aren’t very conclusive.

And no majick, that’s not why you’re going to spend an eternity in hell.

you choose a strange red herring in the DNA subject but okay, what non-LDS accredited scholar has done any peer reviewed work that shows that native americans are descended from israelites?

Why is it a red herring? One of the ex-Mormons here posted something about it in this very thread–see post #104 by xmormon. (I see you didn’t object to it being a red herring back then, though.

I see you have also chosen to ignore the supposedly “divine” revelations of early LDS prophets and apostles to “rewrite” the BoM as some kind of LGT that was secluded from any other indigenous peoples. narrow reading indeed. (principal ancestors, land kept hidden from all others, millions of warriors, no mention of any common atributes of pre-columbian cultures) what’s your degree in? multilevel marketing?

I don’t ignore those revelations. I do think that pretty much all the native americans around now are descended from the Lehi colony. I just think that they have lots of other ancestors, as well.

And FYI, do you have any idea how “Limited Geography Theories” of the Book of Mormon came about? By reading the Book of Mormon. If you pay attention to descriptions of distances and travel times, it is clear that the whole civilization was in an area around a “narrow neck of land,” and a few hundred miles from North to South. So do you really mean “rewrite,” or have you just not read the Book of Mormon carefully? As for all the other objections you mention, some of them are somewhat reasonable, but not conclusive by any means. See Jeff Lindsay’s LDS FAQ website if you really want information about what Mormons typically say about them.

nice rabbit trail on the trinity as well. do you think that will mask the original trinitarian view of JS that is STILL in the BoM? or do you really hope to reconcile theosis with eternal progression?

Wait a minute. “Xmormon” also previously mentioned that “rabbit trail” on this thread. So once again, you didn’t give a peep when he said it, but now you’re acting like your the ever-so-patient martyr who has to stop the Mormon trolls from changing the subject. Nice try.

In any case, I understand that the Book of Mormon says that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are “one God.” I understand that Jesus is called “the Father of Heaven and Earth” several times. But I also know that the Book of Mormon depicts Jesus praying to the Father in Heaven (3 Ne. 17:15). I also know that the BofM has Jesus saying the he was “with” the Father in the beginning (3 Ne. 9:15), and ascended up to be with the Father after his resurrection (3 Ne. 26:15). And 600 years earlier, Nephi reported hearing the voices of both the Father and the pre-incarnate Son (2 Ne. 31:11-15). I also know that Joseph Smith’s Book of Moses, written a few months after the Book of Mormon, reports a 3-way conversation between the Father, Jesus, and Satan.

So the truth is that from the Book of Mormon, we get the idea that in some way the Trinity is “One,” and in some way they are “more than one.” Gee, that’s the same thing you can get by quoting similar passages in the Bible. And yet, the real issue between Catholics and Mormons is not “whether” they are “one,” but “how” they are “one.” The only biblical passage I can find that seems to address this question is in John 17, where Jesus prayed to the Father that his disciples would be one together, and one in Jesus and the Father “as” (meaning “in the same way”) Jesus and the Father are one. Ok, so however the Trinity is “one,” we can be “one” with God in the same way.

Can you find another passage that says “how” the Trinity is “one”?

I’m just wondering which LDS missionary board whyme pulled you off of.

Don’t know him, and I don’t actually participate in any LDS boards of any type.

 

[why_me]

It’s not going to work…

Why me" I would like to know why you are teaching your children that the LDS church is true but yet your kinda practicing being Catholic? The doctrine is what is important. Are your children confused???

I am not teaching my children that the lds church is true but I am also not teaching them that it is false. They can decide for themselves since they are now adults. I just know that they support me when I attend the catholic church. Now isn’t that nice?

 

[why_me]

YOU stood as a Lector at Mass in a Catholic Church???!!! Do you even know what a “Lector” is? A Lector is a position of honor, not just a reader; a Lector is a teacher, a participant in leading the Mass, one whose responsibility is to assist the Priest in teaching the Scripture/Gospel at Mass.

Does your Parish Priest know that you actively promote and defend the false and heretical teachings of Mormonsim on a CATHOLIC board? Does he know that you actively obfuscate the full truth behind Mormon teachings? Does he know that you encourage people from Mormon boards to come here and do the same? Does he know that you encourage Catholics to meet with Mormon missionaries? Does he know that you have a testimony of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon?

You may be a very nice person, and I’m sure you are. That said, your behavior was absolutely scandalous, sacrilegious and profane. It’s one thing to come to this board and do what you do, it is quite another thing to desecrate the Mass. You made a mockery of that Mass and blatantly disrespected the Church, the Parish, the Priest, the other participants and the entire body assembled. It totally blows me away that anybody with any sense of propriety at all would have the gall to pull a stunt like that. Please don’t EVER do that again.

By the way, albeit for a different reason, I’m sure your stake president, bishop and ward would be every bit as incensed as I am over your performance.

I do a good job when I read. And people have commented on what a good reader I am. I think that the priest is satisfied with my work. Plus, I have told nuns that I defend the mormon faith on this board because of the unchristian-like comments I read about the lds church. They seem to understand.

 

[why_me]

I was not referring to Mormons and what they believe. I was referring to YOU and what you believe. No matter how you dance around it, defending Mormonism and its doctrines, as a Catholic is, as someone else pointed out, heresy. It would be equivalent to a Catholic defending gnosticism or Arianism.

Many the antimormon posters more christian is a worthwhile goal in my opinion. I do believe that many of the antimormons that post here need to confess their sins of speaking ill about another person’s religion. As one priest said: If a person is happy in their faith, it is not his business to convert them to catholicism. I feel the same way. When the catholic antimormon posters begin to have respect for the lds church and for what it has done in the world, I would claim that they are now becoming more christian in their outlook.