Is Mormonism a Polytheistic religion?

[rainman10]

Catholic-RCIA,

I have answered about worshiping Jesus Christ time and again. The answer is yes.

The answer to your last question is that I do, and rejoice in understanding His guiding influence in my life and the lives of many, many people I love. I see and feel it every day of my life, which as you may know makes life very purposeful and joyful.

As far as Catholic worship, it is not really my business nor have I accused any of any of the things you mentioned.

This is interesting and confusing. If I remember correctly, Parker stated in another thread just recently (I think it was on the “LDS beliefs about Jesus Christ?” thread) stated that he in fact does not worship Jesus Christ. I wonder which is true, Yes or No?

 

[catholic-rcia]

Catholic-RCIA,

I think you know that Latter-day Saints do not formally pray to Jesus, nor did Jesus teach that He should be prayed to. Latter-day Saints follow what Jesus taught, and follow His example and the example of the apostles.

We certainly can feel like we have the kind of relationship with Jesus that results in a conversational approach such as “thank you, Jesus, for helping me in this.” Or, “Jesus, I love you so very much and am so thankful for all you have done for me.” These could be thoughts in the mind–words in the heart.

That’s what I was searching for;

"'We certainly can feel like we have the kind of relationship with Jesus that results in a conversational approach such as “thank you, Jesus, for helping me in this.” Or, “Jesus, I love you so very much and am so thankful for all you have done for me.”

For me this works very well in my own life. I don’t know about you but for me it is a two way conversation, yet the Holy Spirit and God the Father are always present. Its like I enter into a conversation with the Father, through Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Weather I start my prayer with “Father” or “Most Holy Spirit” Or “My Lord Jesus” I can focus on Jesus, I can see Him right next to me. It is Jesus who I see, in the Scriptures I get to hear Him speak to me. Knowing full well that it is Father speaking through His Son. I understand the relationship Jesus has with His Father. I get to enter into that relationship because of Jesus. I am just like one of the Apostles walking and talking to Him. The Mass is what motivates this walk, the power behind this walk. It’s the way our Church is set up.

My conversation with Jesus because of the Holy Spirit is not always a simple thanks. Nor am I claiming yours is as well.

I get to hear Jesus speak to me, telling me what I need to do. He comforts me, at times rebukes me out of love. Many times when I ask Him for something, or for sound advice He gives me something entirely different, maybe the last thing I would want to do. I have found that in asking, He can be very demanding. There are many set Catholic prayers to Jesus, even to the Holy Spirit. I love them all, yet my own prayers through out the day are spontaneous. Here is an example of a Prayer to the Holy spirit, prompted by the Holy Spirit.

Breathe into me Holy Spirit, that all my thoughts may be holy. Move in me, Holy Spirit, that my work, too, may be holy. Attract my heart, Holy Spirit, that I may love only what is holy. Strengthen me, Holy Spirit, that I may defend all that is holy. Protect me, Holy Spirit, that I always may be holy.

My first thoughts while reading this particular pray point me to the Sacrament of Confession. Jesus telling me to keep our relationship pure and honest.

“I never send you away Rich, you know that you can always come to me…even in your sin. Right?” Yes my Lord I know this. "Good lets keep moving foreword”.

That was spontaneous and real, just happened. I usually do not write down what Jesus says to me, ……….first time.

It was the set prayer above to the Holy Spirit that just prompted me to write those words from Jesus Himself to me. I hope this does not seem weird to you, maybe your own experience is close to being the same as mine.

In Christ
Rich

 

[ParkerD]

This is interesting and confusing. If I remember correctly, Parker stated in another thread just recently (I think it was on the “LDS beliefs about Jesus Christ?” thread) stated that he in fact does not worship Jesus Christ. I wonder which is true, Yes or No?

Rainman,

If you are referring to the talk by Bruce R McConkie at BYU where he specified a certain specified meaning (“pray to”) for the word “worship” and said the students or faculty shouldn’t “worship” (meaning pray to) Jesus Christ, then you will find that I have been completely consistent in agreeing with Elder McConkie on that doctrinal question.

If you find the post you are referring to and its context, I think you will find the consistency unless one doesn’t bother to read the context.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

**ParkerD wrote:**This example, and the example of using Mormon Doctrine as a source when again that book has always been acknowledged to be one man’s (or two, since **Bruce R McConkie **sometimes quoted Joseph Fielding Smith, his father-in-law) own opinions and thus not an approved source for doctrinal teachings, are what I would cite as examples that when Bennett says “the Mormon church teaches” thus and so, **he is relating personal opinions **and has not used either “teaching sources” for those statements (which means the statement “the Mormon church teaches” is not truthful), or doctrinal sources for those statements.

ParkerD wrote: If you are referring to the talk by Bruce R McConkie at BYU where he specified a certain specified meaning (“pray to”) for the word “worship” and said the students or faculty shouldn’t “worship” (meaning pray to) Jesus Christ, then you will find that I have been completely consistent in agreeing with Elder McConkie on that doctrinal question

Huh? More Mormon double-speak. Here ParkerD says McConkie is not a doctrinal source and then he says he is!

In the same way, he says, YES, he prays to Jesus, then NO, he doesn’t.

ParkerD, come to the new thread or not, as you wish. You started it by your accusation against Bennett.

Jim Dandy.

 

[Tony888]

Can anything that the Mormon religion teaches really be doctrine? Since any of what they teach can be changed by new revelation, how can that be doctrine? True doctrine does not change, ever.

Some commandments are permanent and some are meant for the times we live in.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

JD,

I actually think I understand where Parker is coming from. What I believe he is saying is that the McConkie speech Parker was referring to was a speech in which McConkie was explaining one specific, clearly defined area of established LDS doctrine. His book, on the other hand, is McConkie’s personal attempt at compiling a definitive account of all Mormon doctrine. That attempt failed because while much of the book was accurate it also contained some errors - enough, presumably, to prevent it from being considered the definitive account of LDS doctrine.

Yes? Parker?

 

[Crdl2Grv]

Some commandments are permanent and some are meant for the times we live in.

That’s interesting. Can you give a few examples of which commandments the LDS church has officially declared permanent and which ones they have officially declared temporal?

 

[Tony888]

That’s interesting. Can you give a few examples of which commandments the LDS church has officially declared permanent and which ones they have officially declared temporal?

Well, for Christians in general, I believe many Old Testament commandements given by God were specific to the Jews and to their time. They were replaced and are no longer in force (declared temporal?). Leviticus is a good place to look for examples.

Specific to the LDS - I would say the continuing revelation of the LDS church adds clarification to the teachings of Christ, ensuring relevancy to our evolving times.

I did find a list of the New Testament Commandments. I’ve only skimmed it, but am not aware of any that have been changed by LDS revelation (open to correction here as I’m not an expert)

 

[Crdl2Grv]

JD,

I actually think I understand where Parker is coming from. What I believe he is saying is that the McConkie speech Parker was referring to was a speech in which McConkie was explaining one specific, clearly defined area of established LDS doctrine. His book, on the other hand, is McConkie’s personal attempt at compiling a definitive account of all Mormon doctrine. That attempt failed because while much of the book was accurate it also contained some errors - enough, presumably, to prevent it from being considered the definitive account of LDS doctrine.

Yes? Parker?

Oh, and Parker, you’ve got some fires that need putting out over here…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8188025&postcount=236

 

[ParkerD]

**ParkerD wrote:**This example, and the example of using Mormon Doctrine as a source when again that book has always been acknowledged to be one man’s (or two, since **Bruce R McConkie **sometimes quoted Joseph Fielding Smith, his father-in-law) own opinions and thus not an approved source for doctrinal teachings, are what I would cite as examples that when Bennett says “the Mormon church teaches” thus and so, **he is relating personal opinions **and has not used either “teaching sources” for those statements (which means the statement “the Mormon church teaches” is not truthful), or doctrinal sources for those statements.

ParkerD wrote: If you are referring to the talk by Bruce R McConkie at BYU where he specified a certain specified meaning (“pray to”) for the word “worship” and said the students or faculty shouldn’t “worship” (meaning pray to) Jesus Christ, then you will find that I have been completely consistent in agreeing with Elder McConkie on that doctrinal question

Huh? More Mormon double-speak. Here ParkerD says McConkie is not a doctrinal source and then he says he is!

In the same way, he says, YES, he prays to Jesus, then NO, he doesn’t.

ParkerD, come to the new thread or not, as you wish. You started it by your accusation against Bennett.

Jim Dandy.

JD,

I commented specifically about Bennett’s having written “the Mormon church teaches” and then using sources that are not sources that reflect that statement.

When Elder McConkie was on assignment giving a talk at BYU or in General Conference or writing for the Ensign, such as the following article:

lds.org/ensign/1971/12/how-to-worship?lang=eng&query=worship+Jesus+Christ+pray+Him

then he could be quoted from that source and it could be truthfully said “the Mormon church teaches”. When he wrote the book Mormon Doctrine, he was not acting on assignment and had no “counsel” situation (he was of the First Council of the Seventy at the time, but acted on his own in the writing of the book as was his personal right to do) where apostles looked at his writing and agreed with it.

The problem comes for an outsider looking in, that they would not understand this situation about “doctrine” as compared with “opinion”. One person can have opinions, place them on paper and even publish them, but that does not make them “doctrine”. The LDS approved scriptures and those manuals that have been specifically reviewed and approved by the Quorum of Twelve Apostles and the First Presidency are sources for “Mormon teachings” or what could be quoted as such.

By the way, I haven’t written that I “pray to Jesus”. I wrote that a person can be in “conversation” with Him–since He is the Good Shepherd, this is consistent with acknowledging that relationship.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

JD,

When he wrote the book Mormon Doctrine, he was not acting on assignment and had no “counsel” situation (he was of the First Council of the Seventy at the time, but acted on his own in the writing of the book as was his personal right to do) where apostles looked at his writing and agreed with it.

But what about when he revised it and published later editions? The third edition (I think?) of McConkie’s book “Mormon Doctrine” was revised with the assistant of a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, no? A member who was specifically assigned to do so by the Quorum? And the resulting edition (published in the late 1960’s?) was approved by the First Presidency, no?

 

[Jim_Dandy]

But what about when he revised it and published later editions? The third edition (I think?) of McConkie’s book “Mormon Doctrine” was revised with the assistant of a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, no? A member who was specifically assigned to do so by the Quorum? And the resulting edition (published in the late 1960’s?) was approved by the First Presidency, no?

It was represented to me by Mormons as Mormon doctrine, as it was to Bennett.

mormonmatters.org/2010/05/20/the-death-of-mcconkies-mormon-doctrine/

 

[catholic-rcia]

Rainman,

If you are referring to the talk by Bruce R McConkie at BYU where he specified a certain specified meaning (“pray to”) for the word “worship” and said the students or faculty shouldn’t “worship” (meaning pray to) Jesus Christ, then you will find that I have been completely consistent in agreeing with Elder McConkie on that doctrinal question. End

I am not sure why you would say you worship Jesus when you do not beleive He is God. Does not your faith teach you that all worship is to the Father? I worship and pray to Jesus because He is God the eternal Son. I could worship no other but God Himself. I really did not know that the LDS Worship Jesus. Really did not know.

In the life of a Christian. My life for instance Jesus walks with me, and he speaks to me. I in turn am able to speak to Him as He is my very best friend. This is made possible only through the Holy Spirit. I could not imagine not doing this.
But I am not alone as all Christians have this kind of access to the Father. Jesus would never say to His disciples, you can worship me but you cannot speak to me. Prayer is a sacred form of speech is it not? How can you worship Jesus but not speak to Jesus directly? . How can Jesus love you if He cannot speak to you? Here is a Biblical account of a prayer directly to Jesus.

Acts 7:56-60

But he, filled with the holy Spirit, looked up intently to heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 3
56
and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
57
But they cried out in a loud voice, covered their ears, 4 and rushed upon him together.
58
They threw him out of the city, and began to stone him. The witnesses laid down their cloaks at the feet of a young man named Saul.
59
As they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 5
60
Then he fell to his knees and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them”; and when he said this, he fell asleep.

 

[DevoutOne]

@Paul Dupre. Wow that was an enlightening post about Mormonism! I never fully understood their beliefs.

 

[Tony888]

It was represented to me by Mormons as Mormon doctrine, as it was to Bennett.

mormonmatters.org/2010/05/20/the-death-of-mcconkies-mormon-doctrine/

Jim, let’s put the shoe on the other foot

• you seem to be saying that anything published by a Catholic Preist or Biship MUST TEACH INERRANT CATHOLIC DOCTRINE simply because it was written by a church leader.

This is obviously not true. Sometimes everything written is in line with doctrine. In other cases they have made doctrinal mistakes, or went beyond doctrine (speculation) into an area not revealed by Christ or the earlier Prophets, and not defined by the Magisterium.

The same applies to LDS authors.
If Bennet insists McConkie’s work was all inerrant doctrine, he either very naive, or playing stupid to strengthen his argument

 

[PaulDupre]

It was represented to me by Mormons as Mormon doctrine, as it was to Bennett.

mormonmatters.org/2010/05/20/the-death-of-mcconkies-mormon-doctrine/

When I was at BYU in the mid-70s, “Mormon Doctrine” was the equivalent of an LDS catechism. The leadership may not have thought so, but the members sure did. When a doctrinal debate would break out (which it often did) someone would eventually pull Mormon Doctrine off the shelf and read what it said about the subject. Bam! Debate closed.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[PaulDupre]

ParkerD;8187261:

I really did not know that the LDS Worship Jesus. Really did not know.

They don’t. Parker has explained his idea of “worshipping Jesus” on other threads. He has said that if one obeys the commandments Jesus gave and therefore prays to the Father in Jesus’ name, then that, by association, constitutes “worshipping Jesus”.

Again, the Mormons have redefined all the words in order to be able to tell you something that sounds non-threatening and hides the weirdness and un-Christian nature of Mormonism.

I have a challenge for Parker and all the other LDS:

The next time you are called upon to give the opening- or closing prayer at Sacrament Meeting, march up to the ambo and start your prayer with “Dear Lord Jesus…”

See how fast you are dragged into the bishop’s office.

(Of course none of them would ever consider doing such a thing. )

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[ParkerD]

But what about when he revised it and published later editions? The third edition (I think?) of McConkie’s book “Mormon Doctrine” was revised with the assistant of a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, no? A member who was specifically assigned to do so by the Quorum? And the resulting edition (published in the late 1960’s?) was approved by the First Presidency, no?

Cradle2Grave,

No–it was always his own work, and was presented as such with a statement in the Preface, and was never “approved by the First Presidency”, although since Elder McConkie as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve in later years and was assigned to help with the King James Bible cross referencing system and Bible Dictionary, some parts of his book were used as the entry for certain items in the Bible Dictionary.

 

[ParkerD]

JD,

I actually think I understand where Parker is coming from. What I believe he is saying is that the McConkie speech Parker was referring to was a speech in which McConkie was explaining one specific, clearly defined area of established LDS doctrine. His book, on the other hand, is McConkie’s personal attempt at compiling a definitive account of all Mormon doctrine. That attempt failed because while much of the book was accurate it also contained some errors - enough, presumably, to prevent it from being considered the definitive account of LDS doctrine.

Yes? Parker?

Cradle2Grave,

Yes, correct, in that Elder McConkie presented several of his own views in a way that sounded authoritative but were his own views and opinions and were presented with an authoritative, “this is the way it is” writing style.

 

[ParkerD]

Catholic-RCIA,

I think you know that Latter-day Saints do not formally pray to Jesus, nor did Jesus teach that He should be prayed to. Latter-day Saints follow what Jesus taught, and follow His example and the example of the apostles.

We certainly can feel like we have the kind of relationship with Jesus that results in a conversational approach such as “thank you, Jesus, for helping me in this.” Or, “Jesus, I love you so very much and am so thankful for all you have done for me.” These could be thoughts in the mind–words in the heart.

Definition of “worship” as a verb:

“Pay divine honors to, adore, venerate.”
“Perform acts of homage or adoration.”
“Revere, reverence, honor.”

We do those.

Catholic-RCIA,

I noticed your more recent post addressed to me, and suppose that either you didn’t read this or didn’t understand it. Jesus is God the Son, Emmanuel, “God with us,” Jehovah, Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. To have a conversational relationship with Him does not mean that one needs to pray to Him.

The conversation with you about this seems to show that you haven’t understood my beliefs or my comments. Peace to you.