W
why_me
Guest
Certainly the religious wars between the protestants and catholics after the reformation had much vengence in it. I wonder just what quotations can be pulled during that time.
- Status
S
scipio337
Guest
Can you find it inserted into one of the Sacraments? The Mass?
I’m guessing “No”.
I fully accept that not everything LDS prophets said was prophecy, and understand the distinction between personal statements and prophecy, personal statements and ex cathedra, etc,…
but in the case of the Oath of Vengeance, banning blacks from the priesthood (and all other LDS “saving ordinances”), and Plural Marriage, these were not just statements by LDS leaders, but DOGMA accepted as part of revelation.
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
If I may. Read through the postings here. Sin in the Catholic Church through the ages is a terrible argument for a restoration. Think about it. Its why Jesus died for us. It’s precisely why we have been gifted the great Sacraments of Eucharist and Confession. Makes no sense to go there. At least not in the Catholic faith.
W
why_me
Guest
No, of course not. Much better to take quotations from BY of what he reportedly said. And of course we have no idea of the context of the quotation or what came before that quotation or after it.
F
FidesSpesCarita
Guest
True, and L.Ron really didnt write all those papers about inventing a religion as a tax shelter. Noooo, of course he didnt. Neither did BY say any of those things, nor did JS say the things he is purported to have said. Its all a conspiracy to discredit the Prophets!!!
Just my $.02
S
scipio337
Guest
When what he said had a direct effect on LDS dogma, I would say it is open to interpretation, and criticism.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
God did shady things?
You must have a really low opinion of God.
Just to clarify for you, God does nothing shady. Men on the other had can and does. But I’m sure you don’t want to open that can of worms.
X
xixxvmcm85
Guest
Or it might be that I’m doing a pitiful job explaining my position, in which case I do apologize. I don’t know if there are Mormons out there comparing what Brigham Young said or did to what a 14th century pope said or did. If there are, I agree with you that such is an exercise in futility. What I’m saying is that comparing what Brigham Young said or did to today’s standard of morality is equally as futile as comparing what 14th century pontiffs said or did to today’s standard of morality.
Indeed they do, but it is the position of most Mormons today that these troubling quotes by Brigham Young were not necessary revelation. This is starting to echo back to my original post in this thread: Mormons do not believe that their prophets are prophesying every single minute of every single day, just as we Catholics do not believe that our popes are defining infallible dogma in every papal document that comes from Rome.
X
xixxvmcm85
Guest
And as I mentioned earlier it is not part of Mormon theology that the prophet functions as a prophet in everything he says and does. You do make a good distinction between what previous religious leaders have done compared to what they have taught. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: From what I know of both Catholic and LDS history, the scandalous bits of the few popes in history with poor track records surrounded what they did. It’s very hard to find a pope that has taught something heretical or that was later repudiated (difficult, but not impossible). Brigham Young on the other had taught a lot of things that have since been repudiated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Yet save for the so-called Fundamentalist Mormons, who are not members of the LDS Church, I’ve yet to meet a Mormon who has ascribed a revelatory status to these tid bits of Brigham Young.
X
xixxvmcm85
Guest
Our friend here is being flippant. The Oath of Vengeance is a Mormon thing, not a Catholic one. Once upon a time, practicing Latter Day Saints were required to swear to avenge the martyrdom of Joseph Smith. I vaguely remember being taught about this by my folks who (if memory serves me well) told me the oath was removed from the temple ceremony sometime in the 70’s.
I cannot attest to this via experience as I’m relatively young. My first time through the temple was in 1998, and this was only a partial experience to do baptisms for the dead. My first time taking out an Endowment was in 2004 by which time there was no such oath.
X
xixxvmcm85
Guest
You’re absolutely correct, but there are some distinctions that I feel must be made for those who aren’t too well familiar with LDS theology. The priesthood ban was indeed about as dogmatic as you can get in Mormonism, and I don’t know of any Latter Day Saints that dispute that the ban was revelatory in nature. It after all required a subsequent revelation to undo. All the vile explanations for the ban produced by various LDS general authorities through the years, culminating in the 1978 revelation, are what’s questioned. That black people “weren’t valiant enough in the pre-existence” or that the ban was the consequence of “the Mark of Cain”, and other such attributions I don’t believe can be said to be “dogmatic” to Mormonism, especially given the fact that multiple explanations were simultaneously employed.
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
(Edited) God is good. God is never evil. God cannot lie. But as Fr. Corapi says, sometimes God will allow a human-created evil to continue in order to derive a greater good from it. If you watch for it, you will find this to be true.
As for bloodshed and racism, God is not on record for advocating either. The fact that Brigham young advocated racist policies, and that racism was once embedded in LDS doctrine, shows that God was not involved in those policies and that doctrine. I challenge anyone to show where RACISM has been DOCTRINE in any other faith other than Mormonism.
One time in the past, we had God here walking and talking among us, in the form of Jesus, we got a very clear picture about God. Racism was never part of Jesus’ ministry, quite the opposite. Racism is not of God. No human can claim that their racism is related to their understanding of God.
It can be argued, and I would agree, that Brigham Young was a product of his age. If he were just an ordinary citizen this wouldn’t be an issue. But Mormons of the time sustained him as a Prophet of God and Mormons today still assert that, although they seem to be distancing themselves from many of his statements that are hard to defend.
But the utterances of Brigham Young should not be confused with the opinions of God. To go further and suggest that God is also a racist and, at least at one time, approved of Young’s racist opinions, is blasphemy in my opinion.
(Edited)
As for bloodshed and racism, God is not on record for advocating either. The fact that Brigham young advocated racist policies, and that racism was once embedded in LDS doctrine, shows that God was not involved in those policies and that doctrine. I challenge anyone to show where RACISM has been DOCTRINE in any other faith other than Mormonism.
One time in the past, we had God here walking and talking among us, in the form of Jesus, we got a very clear picture about God. Racism was never part of Jesus’ ministry, quite the opposite. Racism is not of God. No human can claim that their racism is related to their understanding of God.
It can be argued, and I would agree, that Brigham Young was a product of his age. If he were just an ordinary citizen this wouldn’t be an issue. But Mormons of the time sustained him as a Prophet of God and Mormons today still assert that, although they seem to be distancing themselves from many of his statements that are hard to defend.
But the utterances of Brigham Young should not be confused with the opinions of God. To go further and suggest that God is also a racist and, at least at one time, approved of Young’s racist opinions, is blasphemy in my opinion.
(Edited)
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
S
SirThomasMore
Guest
Ah…but, if I speak daily to Angelina Jolie, and we talk face to face (as mormon prophets claim they do with God) and you KNOW I speak daily to Angelina Jolie, and then I tell you that Angelina Jolie loves spaghetti, you will bleieve she loves spaghetti because, since I talk to her face to face, I should know.
BY spoke to God face to face then says things about God and makes statements about blacks, you figure he knows, becauyse he talks to God face to face. It does not have to be declared scripture to be true…and BY MUST know…
S
SirThomasMore
Guest
bump
- Status