How do Mormons view Our Lady?

[SteveVH]

Judas, I am happy to see you understand that concept. LDS prophets, apostles, General Authorities have never professed they are perfect.

In the words of Joseph Smith:
"I told them I was but a man, and they must not expect me to be perfect; if they expected perfection from me, I should expect it from them; but if they would bear with my infirmities and the infirmities of the brethren, I would likewise bear with their infirmities.”

lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=9609b00367c45110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=da135f74db46c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Are your religious leaders perfect? Do they ever say or write things in speculation?

When it comes to statements concerning faith or morals (doctrine), yes our religious leaders (the Pope, together with the Magisterium) are perfect because they have the protection of the Holy Spirit who “guides them into all truth”. They are prevented from error. And I don’t care if it is just sipping coffee with some friends in a personal setting. If the Pope uttered something like “I’m not really sure about the whole Trinity thing…” he would be held to account for that statement. If they are speculating what the weather is going to be next week, then certainly, no such protection is afforded and they could very well be in error.

It would be hard to know what your leaders have said, because the vast majority of Catholics and Catholic Reverts posting are not explaining and defending their Catholic faith, or providing sources of such beliefs, or even using this blog as a means to explain or defend Catholicism.

What would you like to know, specifically?

 

[TexanKnight]

When it comes to statements concerning faith or morals (doctrine), yes our religious leaders (the Pope, together with the Magisterium) are perfect because they have the protection of the Holy Spirit who “guides them into all truth”. They are prevented from error. And I don’t care if it is just sipping coffee with some friends in a personal setting. If the Pope uttered something like “I’m not really sure about the whole Trinity thing…” he would be held to account for that statement.

What would you like to know, specifically?

lol…can you imagine Pope Francis saying, “don’t pay any attention to what Pope JPII said, Live Popes are more accurate than Dead Popes”

 

[Lochias]

It seems as though LDS “prophets” are ultimately pointless. They preach the “truth” from God until it was suddenly never the truth at all, but just an opinion.

 

[SteveVH]

lol…can you imagine Pope Francis saying, “don’t pay any attention to what Pope JPII said, Live Popes are more accurate than Dead Popes”

Exactly. Once doctrine, always doctrine.

 

[CarolNoel]

He’s trying to fly under the radar.

That’s one of the reason he is dodging the religious affiliation questions.

The neat thing is, when people do this, their posting style eventually nails them to the wall so to speak.

Z did it, now why me.

Oh My. I also remember Why Me. Is he really baaaaaaaaaaack.

 

[iepuras]

And I don’t know why women in the LDS would claim to want priesthood as I believe they already serve that function in secret temples. I watched the temple rituals exposed by hidden cameras, heard “priests and priestesses,” so where’s the beef?

As a former ordinance worker in the temple, I can confirm that women perform priesthood ordinances for women in the temple - namely, the initiatory (washings & anointings) and the endowment.

Back in “pioneer days”, Mormon women often blessed each other and their children in a similar manner as the men. They did not use specific priesthood authority like the men do, but they blessed none the less. I learned of this history not long before I left the Mormon church. The loss of this beautiful tradition made me sad. These great women were blessing each other as they labored in child birth and blessed their new babies. Mothers often blessed their children as the fathers were often not there due to polygamy. I don’t understand why LDS women are no longer encouraged/allowed to bless like their pioneer ancestors did. It would certainly empower the women. Maybe that is the problem.

 

[Boulder257]

As a former ordinance worker in the temple, I can confirm that women perform priesthood ordinances for women in the temple - namely, the initiatory (washings & anointings) and the endowment.

Back in “pioneer days”, Mormon women often blessed each other and their children in a similar manner as the men. They did not use specific priesthood authority like the men do, but they blessed none the less. I learned of this history not long before I left the Mormon church. The loss of this beautiful tradition made me sad. These great women were blessing each other as they labored in child birth and blessed their new babies. Mothers often blessed their children as the fathers were often not there due to polygamy. I don’t understand why LDS women are no longer encouraged/allowed to bless like their pioneer ancestors did. It would certainly empower the women. Maybe that is the problem.

That statement really resonated with me. I never thought about that. It makes me really sad.

 

[Porknpie]

You keep dodging the things said by BY,…are you now admitting he was not a prophet?

Only LDS prophets break the law and the Ten Commandments. Then the LDS Church honors them.

Perhaps they weren’t actually prophets…

 

[gracepoole]

I’ve gone through pages of this blog, and don’t even know why Mary is referred to as “Our Lady” by the Catholics.

Disappointed,

mrgloop

I can’t give you a definitive answer but the plural pronoun is important – she is ours. A lady for all. She is not God, but her name is similar to Our Lord – he is Lord of all and Mary is mother to all. I actually find that Catholics here are ready, willing, and able to offer explanations when specific questions are asked – I’m sorry you haven’t experienced the same. I do appreciate your being here. I keep hearing about LDS folks who used to hang here but have since left, and that makes it close to impossible to fully understand their responses to charges leveled at them on CAF.

 

[gracepoole]

(And it’s the Feast of the Assumption! All too appropriate to be discussing the Blessed Virgin Mary today.)

 

[Porknpie]

It seems as though LDS “prophets” are ultimately pointless. They preach the “truth” from God until it was suddenly never the truth at all, but just an opinion.

Yep not the truth. And the human intellect is able to discern this as TexanKnight and many other ex-LDS on this website have. So are current LDS when they study their church history. Joseph Smith basically made it all up…breaking the Ten Commandments and the Law by committing adultery, marrying 34 women, two of which were 14 years old. He preached a new gospel which we are warned in the bible not to listen to even if spoken from an Angel.

[BIBLEDRB]Galatians 1:8[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[gracepoole]

Joseph Smith basically made it all up…breaking the Ten Commandments and the Law by committing adultery, marrying 34 women, two of which were 14 years old. He preached a new gospel which we are warned in the bible not to listen to even if spoken from an Angel.

[BIBLEDRB]Galatians 1:8[/BIBLEDRB]

So in your view, was he misguided? A charlatan? Mentally ill?

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Okay…Back to Mary, it’s her Assumption today, Christians Unite!

Let’s go back to what Orson Pratt said (I just can’t get enough of it):"The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus,
according to the flesh, must have been associated in the capacity of husband and wife; hence the Virgin Mary
must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful wife, because it
would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Savior unlawfully…
He had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary IN THE CAPACITY OF A HUSBAND, and beget a Son…

Whether God the Father gave Mary to Joseph for time only, or for time and etern-
ity, we are not informed. It may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph
while in this mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take
her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity."
Apostle Orson Pratt, “The Seer,” Oct. 1853, p. 158).Now remember, Orson Pratt was ordained an on April 26, 1831 by the Prophet Joseph
Smith, Jr. He knew the guy, knew what he taught, actually heard from and spoke with
that Smith, so I think it’s very likely that Pratt didn’t come up with that “Mormon God
getting one with Mary” thing on his own. I admit that **THIS **is speculation, but it’s kind-
a fun to think about, Smith being the originator of the God/Mary deal.

 

[TexanKnight]

So in your view, was he misguided? A charlatan? Mentally ill?

easy. Con man. He was a convicted con man before he was an alleged prophet.

Then, in a time where he admits there was a religious fervor, he did what several other did: claimed to have a visit from God. On a different thread, I listed several people who made the same claim js did BEFORE he made it. He heard them, liked the idea, and made a similar claim.

Then he took the stone he was using to look for buried treasure and used it to translate golden plates that no one else ever saw except through their “spiritual eyes”.

Soon, he was revered with his people. He could ask them to build them a house because God wanted them to build him a house, and he got a house. he could say God wanted a man to give him that man’s wife, and he got the wife. He tried to do a bank, and cheated a lot of people and then left town. He claimed he was a lamb when he was killed, but he had an illegal gun and fired blindly at people down the stairs, then tried to jump from a window to leave his friends behind to face whatever would happen.

That is js

 

[twopekinguys]

I really don’t care one way or the other. I do see some problems here though. I think that Mormons have a lot of sources to draw from. They have their own website where they can discover certain things. They have the Joseph Smith Papers where they can discover more things. Some posters pull out quotations from Brigham Young’s Journal of Discourses. I put that in the search in lds.org and got this:

lds.org/topics/journal-of-discourses?lang=eng

And that information is all over the place. Which bit is right? Which “prophet” is right?

Which prophet gets to drive the bus rolling over the previous one?

With no definitive teaching and decisions regarding doctrinal issues, people are free to have thousands of conflicting opinions.

Which is exactly what mormonism is.

 

[gracepoole]

easy. Con man. He was a convicted con man before he was an alleged prophet.

Then, in a time where he admits there was a religious fervor, he did what several other did: claimed to have a visit from God. On a different thread, I listed several people who made the same claim js did BEFORE he made it. He heard them, liked the idea, and made a similar claim.

Then he took the stone he was using to look for buried treasure and used it to translate golden plates that no one else ever saw except through their “spiritual eyes”.

Soon, he was revered with his people. He could ask them to build them a house because God wanted them to build him a house, and he got a house. he could say God wanted a man to give him that man’s wife, and he got the wife. He tried to do a bank, and cheated a lot of people and then left town. He claimed he was a lamb when he was killed, but he had an illegal gun and fired blindly at people down the stairs, then tried to jump from a window to leave his friends behind to face whatever would happen.

That is js

I remember reading several years ago an historian who claimed that the BoM reads like a 19th-century religious text, not a revealed text from earlier centuries. That makes sense in terms of what you’ve said here. What about BY? I always assumed that he was more truthful in his beliefs than JS – or was he also a con man?

 

[TexanKnight]

I remember reading several years ago an historian who claimed that the BoM reads like a 19th-century religious text, not a revealed text from earlier centuries. That makes sense in terms of what you’ve said here. What about BY? I always assumed that he was more truthful in his beliefs than JS – or was he also a con man?

for him, it was all about wives and power. He loved the power. After the Massacre at Mountain Meadows, (it is suspected he ordered it) some folks built a little memorial. He kicked it down and said “Vengeance is mine and I have taken a little”.

 

[Porknpie]

So in your view, was he misguided? A charlatan? Mentally ill?

I’ll just say this…Joseph got into trouble selling snake oil prior to his religious life and he claimed he could find water and treasure in the ground using a seer stone, something he then brought into his religious deception by claiming to use a seer stone to translate tablets that he found in the ground.

My sense is the guy was pretty intelligent.

Guided by an angel from God? Certainly not.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I’ve gone through pages of this blog, and don’t even know why Mary is referred to as “Our Lady” by the Catholics.

Disappointed,

mrgloop

Why are you disappointed that you never got an answer to a question you never asked? Did you know that the word madonna means my lady and not mother as most seem to think. But back to your disappointment, In your first post (discounting the post 3 years ago about honey bees) you posed this question :"Why do so few posts specifically mention the Southern Baptist or United Methodist organizations?" Your next 2 posts were for clarification and rebuttal. In none of your subsequent posts in this thread did you display any interest in learning about Catholicism, you simply stated and defended LDS beliefs. Not that this is in anyway unacceptable, in fact that is just what is expected on a board dedicated to discussion (this is not a blog just so you know). However to complain that you don’t get answers to questions you didn’t ask can only be viewed as a diversion. That’s like saying a touchdown scored isn’t fair because it’s lunch time

So even though I find your complaint completely unwarranted I will offer this Catholics’s answer. The use of Our Lady is often associated with Marion Apparitions so you will hear Our Lady of Guadalupe or Our Lady of Lourdes, others are not so known like Our Lady of Knock. Gracepoole has given the basics, Lady is a honorific directed toward Mary and the Our denotes the way we are connected to her through her Son.

 

[zaffiroborant]

mrgloop:
Well then, provide some Catholic Answers. I’ve provided plenty—plenty, of Mormon ones.
I have provided answers. Why do you complain that there are no answers when you don’t ask questions?