Gene Fadness, ex-Mormon, on Catholic Answers

[StevieD]

Jordan Vajda was a Catholic priest that converted to Mormonism a few years ago. He wrote a very interesting dissertation comparing and contrasting the beliefs of the ECFs/traditional Christians on theosis and the Mormon exaltation.

I knew about him but you did say “priests” (plural) - so who are the others?

 

[TheosisM]

I knew about him but you did say “priests” (plural) - so who are the others?

I assume you’re asking this to dianaiad.

 

[dianaiad]

I’ll dig out the quotes, JS Jr was very agressively anti-Catholic (BY was, by contrast quite gentle towards us, though he owed us a lot, it was a Jesuit missionary that pointed him to the Great Salt Lake). So, to repeat my question, who are these Catholic priests who converted to the LDS that you mentioned?
Your accusation of impoliteness made me smile - everyone seems to be polite on the forums you subscribe to except one person who is generally sarcastic and agressive - who so you think that could that be? Well get your gloves on!

Please do dig out the quotes.

…

…and… huh? Actually, I only know, personally, one Catholic priest who converted. I didn’t know he used to be a Catholic priest until I’d known both him and his wife for several years, though.

I"m not quite certain what you are referring to, actually.

 

[LittleDeb]

I don’t honestly have a problem with a former Catholic priest converting to LDS. If he honestly believes in an apostasy, I wouldn’t want him to stay Catholic and certainly not be a priest. I would of course be of the *opinion *that he didn’t know Catholic teaching if he came to believe otherwise.

Now Gene converted because of a deeper understanding of the *Person *of Jesus. Gene actually came to know Christ and fully believes that He *is *God. That belief is incompatible with being LDS so he was right to leave. I celebrate that Gene came all the way home to all Truth and didn’t just stop at Evangelical. My experience in my heavily LDS populated area is that many former LDS become Evangelical. Some say they aren’t open to the Catholic Church because of the hierarchy. They say it reminds them of the LDS structure. I try to patiently remind them that no, the LDS structure is taken *from *the Catholic structure, but they are not even close to the same.

As I said, I got a kick out of Gene’s chuckle at all the studying he is having to do for the Deaconate. He was a “deacon” when he was LDS. But he didn’t have to study, and he was 12.

 

[StevieD]

Please do dig out the quotes.

…

…and… huh? Actually, I only know, personally, one Catholic priest who converted. I didn’t know he used to be a Catholic priest until I’d known both him and his wife for several years, though.

I"m not quite certain what you are referring to, actually.

The BoM describes the church several times as a “whore”. Of course, you would claim that JS Jr was not the author (even though of course he was, with others).
Also (just a sample of other references):
“All the priests who adhere to the sectarian [Christian] religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels” (The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith, ed. Vol. 1, n. 4, 60).
“The Roman Catholic Church specifically—singled out, set apart, described, and designated as being ‘most abominable above all other churches’ (I Ne. 13:5)” (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, 129).
“Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls (Morm. 8; Moro. 8)”

As a member of the LDS, you presumably have little choice but to support the clear teaching of your ‘church’ that we are damned without exception? So, please do not be so sensitive about less than flattering comments made about LDS. No Catholic says that mormons are damned without exception.

“and…huh actually etc” - re the Catholic priest, I don’t believe you.

 

[Javl]

In reading the unpurgated version of JS’s writing of the BoM, JS says that the golden plates shown him were written in “Reformed Egytian”. I contacted Dr. Zahi Awass, a foremost Egyptologist and requested his knowledge of this “Reformed Egyptian”. The following is his reply:

Dear Leonard,

Thank you for your letter. I am terribly sorry for the lateness of my reply; I have been quite busy these last few months. There is no such thing as reformed Egyptian writing. Egyptian script evolved through time from the Predynastic to the Roman Period. Initially, during the Predynastic Period, hieroglyphs were created and the grammar slowly evolved from what Egyptologists refer to as Old Egyptian to Middle Egyptian, and then Late Egyptian. During the New Kingdom, a second script developed called Hieratic, which is a short hand version of hieroglyphs. Later, during the Greco-Roman Period, the Demotic script was developed; this is a mix between Egyptian script and Greek. The ancient Egyptians also employed such scripts as Coptic, Greek and Latin, but this came much later in the civilization’s history.

All the best,

Zahi Hawass

I leave the rest to you.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[dianaiad]

The BoM describes the church several times as a “whore”. Of course, you would claim that JS Jr was not the author (even though of course he was, with others).

You expect me to agree with you on this?

Really?
by the way, the Book of Mormon never mentions Catholicism, just so you know.

Also (just a sample of other references):
“All the priests who adhere to the sectarian [Christian] religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels” (The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith, ed. Vol. 1, n. 4, 60).
“The Roman Catholic Church specifically—singled out, set apart, described, and designated as being ‘most abominable above all other churches’ (I Ne. 13:5)” (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, 129).
“Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls (Morm. 8; Moro. 8)”

As a member of the LDS, you presumably have little choice but to support the clear teaching of your ‘church’ that we are damned without exception? So, please do not be so sensitive about less than flattering comments made about LDS. No Catholic says that mormons are damned without exception.

“and…huh actually etc” - re the Catholic priest, I don’t believe you.

No Mormon says that all Catholics are damned without exception, either…and not only that, we aren’t the ones who have excommunicated YOU right out of the Christian brotherhood. That would be you denying us our very Christianity. Frankly, that IS saying that we are 'damned without exception." You do realize that, don’t you?

As a member of the LDS, I have little choice but to support the clear teaching of our church that there are two churches; the church of the devil, and the church of God, or Jesus. The membership in either church is based upon individuals, not groups. There ARE many Catholics who are members of the "church of the devil,’ it is true. There are also many who are members of the church of Christ. The same goes for Mormons, Lutherans, Baptists, Budhists, Hindus…

the final judgment will let us all know who is who; but the individual members of each church probably have a fair idea which one they belong to. It depends mostly upon what their hearts are set on.

As for your believing me or not, that’s up to you, but I honestly have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Arandur]

No Mormon says that all Catholics are damned without exception, either…and not only that, we aren’t the ones who have excommunicated YOU right out of the Christian brotherhood. That would be you denying us our very Christianity. Frankly, that IS saying that we are 'damned without exception." You do realize that, don’t you?

Excommunication is not damnation. It is a recognition of a separation from the full truths of Christ and his Church, a separation from the communion table. It is quite different from damnation, which is a judgment only God can make, and which we understand to be a rejection of His perfect love.

It sounds like you are saying that the Catholic Church has excommunicated the LDS. How can one be “ex-” communicated from a communion they were never part of?

The Catholic Church recognizes God’s truth and brotherhood in people of many religions, separated though we may be from full communion. The separation itself is not cause for damnation, but is most often a result of the imperfections of this world and fallen nature. The Church has recognized that many who are not in communion with the Church are not separated from salvation by that lack of full communion. To the extent that anyone embraces God’s truth and love, that person is part of the wider catholic family of Christ and thus can be saved.

 

[dianaiad]

Excommunication is not damnation. It is a recognition of a separation from the full truths of Christ and his Church, a separation from the communion table. It is quite different from damnation, which is a judgment only God can make, and which we understand to be a rejection of His perfect love.

It sounds like you are saying that the Catholic Church has excommunicated the LDS. How can one be “ex-” communicated from a communion they were never part of?

You mean…like the Catholic anullment of marraige?

The Catholic Church recognizes God’s truth and brotherhood in people of many religions, separated though we may be from full communion. The separation itself is not cause for damnation, but is most often a result of the imperfections of this world and fallen nature. The Church has recognized that many who are not in communion with the Church are not separated from salvation by that lack of full communion. To the extent that anyone embraces God’s truth and love, that person is part of the wider catholic family of Christ and thus can be saved.

Ok, I’m going to put this very bluntly.

We are not Catholics. We don’t want to be Catholics. We don’t want to be accepted as Catholics. We do not accept Catholic baptisms as valid, and it doesn’t bother us at all that Catholics do not consider ours to be valid–except for one thing: we don’t accept any Christian baptism to be valid but ours. We aren’t telling Christians that our non-acceptance of their baptisms means that they are not Christian, or 'worship a different Christ," or damned, or somehow lesser. Our non-acceptance of their baptisms is about priesthood authority, not their faith in Christ or their beliefs, correct or not. We accept them all as Christians, and accept that their faith in Christ is real, if misinformed.

The Catholic refusal to accept our baptisms is not about priesthood authority. It’s about making us 'other." It’s about refusing to accept us as Christians, as worshipers of and believers in Jesus the Christ. It is following the example of the Protestants whose rejection of us as Christian is ALWAYS followed by discrimination and persecution.

Every single time. It’s not about recognizing our own opinions of our beliefs (as when Catholics say that Jews are not Christian, or Muslims are not Christian, or that Hindus are not Christian–they are not Christian, say that they aren’t and don’t want to be.). It’s about calling us liars when we claim to be Christians and to worship Christ. It’s about condemnation.

It is a step beyond saying “well, Mormons are Christians, but their beliefs are all wrong and because of their different understanding of the Trinity, their baptism is not valid.” It’s saying “Mormons are upstarts, liars, not worth communicating with, damned…”

He whom one would persecute one must first make ‘other.’

It’s that.

 

[why_me]

In reading the unpurgated version of JS’s writing of the BoM, JS says that the golden plates shown him were written in “Reformed Egytian”. I contacted Dr. Zahi Awass, a foremost Egyptologist and requested his knowledge of this “Reformed Egyptian”. The following is his reply:

I leave the rest to you.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

lightplanet.com/mormons/response/bom/Reformed_Egyptian.htm

What is “reformed Egyptian?”

Critics who raise the objection seem to be operating under the false impression that reformed Egyptian is used in the Book of Mormon as a proper name. In fact, the word reformed is used in the Book of Mormon in this context as an adjective, meaning “altered, modified, or changed.” This is made clear by Mormon, who tells us that “the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, [were] handed down and altered by us” and that “none other people knoweth our language” (Mormon 9:32, 34). First we should emphasize that Mormon is describing Egyptian characters, or what we today would call a script or writing system. It is the form or shape of the characters or symbols that was altered by the Nephites. Nephite reformed Egyptian is thus a unique script. It derived from the Egyptian writing systems but then was modified and adapted to suit Nephite language and writing materials.

You are misinformed about what exactly is reformed Egyptian.

 

[Gene_Fadness]

Hi all,
wow, I didn’t even know these posts existed or this discussion was going on until just today (Dec. 24)! Interesting discussion indeed. Merry Christmas to you all. Isaiah had it right: Jesus truly is the Wonderful Counselor, the Mighty God (!), the Everlasting FATHER, the Prince of Peace!!! May you sense his presence this season and throughout the year.
God bless,
Gene

 

[zerinus]

Hi all,
wow, I didn’t even know these posts existed or this discussion was going on until just today (Dec. 24)! Interesting discussion indeed. Merry Christmas to you all. Isaiah had it right: Jesus truly is the Wonderful Counselor, the Mighty God (!), the Everlasting FATHER, the Prince of Peace!!! May you sense his presence this season and throughout the year.
God bless,
Gene

Hi, it looks like I may have missed this thread too. I am listening to your interview right now. Sounds interesting. I have to listen to all of it first before I can comment. Hang around, and I am sure others will want to ask you questions too.

 

[Gene_Fadness]

Hi Zeriunus,
Thanks for listening! But I have to get off the page for a while. I will return if you have questions!
God bless you.
Gene Fadness

 

[zerinus]

Hi Zeriunus,
Thanks for listening! But I have to get off the page for a while. I will return if you have questions!
God bless you.
Gene Fadness

Thank you Gene. I have just finished listening to your interview, and I do have some questions to ask. I think that you have seriously misrepresented or misunderstood many aspects of Mormon theology. Here are some highlights that I picked up after listening to your radio interview:

1. With regard to Hebrews 7 about which you said you had a conversation with a Catholic priest that provided the trigger for you to start doubting Mormonism, here are the relevant verses:

1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;
3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
4 Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.

Did you ever wonder (or ask the Catholic priest) how Melchizedek, who is obviously a man and the king of Salem, to whom Abraham paid tithes, could have been “Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life”? That is the attribute of God! Only God can be “without beginning of days or end of life”. So unless Melchizedek was God—which he wasn’t, because the scriptures tells us that he was a man—how could he have had those attributes? There is obviously something missing from that verse; or there is something wrong with the way we are understanding it. Unless you can clear up that ambiguity, that scripture seems a dubious way to start doubting Mormonism. I think that your real problem lay somewhere else. Hebrews 7 was an excuse to get yourself out.

1. You said that Mormons believe that God is only the God of this world. That is not true. Mormons believe that God is the God of all worlds. He is the creator of the entire universe. There is no such thing as just “the God of this world”.
2. You said Mormons believe they can become “gods of their own planets”. That is not genuine Mormon doctrine. That is speculative Mormon doctrine. Mormons believe they can become “gods,” that is true; but not “gods of their own planets”. That is not stated anywhere in Mormon scripture.
3. You said that Mormons worship the God of this world. That is not correct. Mormons worship the God of all worlds, the God of the entire universe.
4. You said that Mormons believe in several gods. That is true, and it is in agreement with traditional (orthodox) Christian doctrine. There is plenty of evidence for that in the writings of Early Church Fathers.
5. You said that Mormons believe that Jesus is a “lesser God, a secondary God,” but not “God come in the flesh, as orthodox Christians believe”. That is not correct. Mormons believe that Jesus is the Son of God Who came in the flesh. That is what the Bible teaches … don’t know about “orthodox Christians”.
6. You said that Mormons believe that Jesus is “a son of God, … brother of Lucifer, … and a Savior of the world”. That sounds like a deliberate at misrepresentation. The Bible tells us that Lucifer was a son of God (Job 1:6; 2:1). So there is some sense or other in which Jesus and Lucifer in the preexistence were both sons of God; that suggest there is some kind of connection between them. Satan was not always evil. God did not create him evil. He became evil when he chose to rebel against God. I would say your comment was a definite attempt at misrepresentation.
7. You said that in Mormon theology Jesus is not to be prayed to or worshipped. That is not correct. Both the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants teach that Jesus is to be worshipped. But in our formal prayers we follow the pattern of prayer the Lord established in the Lord’s Prayer—i.e. we address our prayers to the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. Can you tell me what is wrong with following the pattern of prayer that Jesus Himself established in the New Testament?
8. You said that Mormons believe that Jesus is the Messiah but not God! That is not true. Mormons believe that Jesus is the Messiah as well as God. He is not God the Father, but God the Son. That is what the Bible teaches, and that is what we believe. I don’t know about you!
9. And lastly, you recommended that when meeting a Mormon, one should ask them if they believe that Jesus is “God come in the flesh”. The answer to that is Yes! We believe that Jesus is God the Son come in the Flesh. He is not God the Father come in the flesh. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God the Father came in the flesh. It says that God the Son came in the flesh, and that is also what Mormons believe.

So what is your answer to these?

 

[zerinus]

So if the Mormon Church comes up to me tomorrow and demands my personal assets, I should give everything I own to them?

When I became a Catholic, these people demanded that I resign my membership or be excommunicated. At the time I became Catholic the Mormon Church said that converting to another church was not grounds for excommunication, but then they changed the rules.

I am sorry to hear that. It is true that there was that rule, and then they changed the rule; but the change of the rule should not have been retroactive. If you became a Catholic before the change of the rule, the change of the rule should not have affected you. I don’t know all the circumstances of your case of course. It may be that there were other factors involved that I don’t know about. But if what you say is true, there must have been a misunderstanding somewhere. You shouldn’t have resigned! If they wanted to excommunicate you, they would have to hold a court, either a bishop’s court of a high council court, and invited you to attend and defend yourself; and such a court would have had a hard time excommunicating you if you told them that you believed that the Church was true, and as far as you are concerned you have not broken any rules. Even if they did, you could always appeal against that decision to the First Presidency, and chances are that their decision would have been overruled. There is no such thing as “threatening” someone with excommunication. The decision to excommunicate can only be made by a Church court, not just by anybody as they feel like it.

 

[ricko]

1. You said that Mormons worship the God of this world. That is not correct. Mormons worship the God of all worlds, the God of the entire universe.

1. You said that Mormons believe in several gods. That is true, and it is in agreement with traditional (orthodox) Christian doctrine. There is plenty of evidence for that in the writings of Early Church Fathers.

Well, la te da!.

 

[KathleenGee]

I have been on call in my work and my family is out of state today…Christmas Day…

The New Testament Letter to the Hebrews 1: In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets; in these last days, he spoke to us through a son, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the universe, who is the refulgence of his glory, the very imprint of his being, and who sustains all the things by his mighty word. When he had accomplished purification from sins, he took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high, as far superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. For to which of the angels did God every say : You are my son; this day I have begotten you’? Or again: “I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me?” Or again: I wil be a father to him and he shall be a son to me’?

I read Anna’s post #89…how she entered Mormonism and then later found out in detail all the beliefs they truly believed in. I did some initial study of Mormonism on my own and got impressions of bait and switch.

I would like to also know from Mr Fades if Mormons believe differently than what they first profess to believe…they lead people in, have them do these oaths, and then be told a number of things so contrary to faith in Christ…

It seems there is so much secrecy to Mormonism that contradicts the open and public and complete revelation of Jesus.

 

[zerinus]

Well, la te da!.

That just reveals your multitude of ignorance. All the early Christians believed that men can become gods and there are many gods. That is a perfectly sound Christian doctrine. I for one, however, am still waiting for Gene Fadness come back and address the points I had raised, as he said he would. Let’s see if he will.

 

[TheosisM]

That just reveals your multitude of ignorance. All the early Christians believed that men can become gods and there are many gods. That is a perfectly sound Christian doctrine. I for one, however, am still waiting for Gene Fadness come back and address the points I had raised, as he said he would. Let’s see if he will.

Are you referring to theosis/deification? If so, yes, that is still found in traditional Christianity, particularly emphasized in the Orthodox Church and Eastern Catholicism. What do you mean that they believed that there are many gods? Is this separate from “men can become gods”?

 

[zerinus]

Are you referring to theosis/deification? If so, yes, that is still found in traditional Christianity, particularly emphasized in the Orthodox Church and Eastern Catholicism. What do you mean that they believed that there are many gods? Is this separate from “men can become gods”?

“Men can become gods” and there being many gods are part of the same doctrine. They amount to the same thing.