LDS and Catholic Differences

  • Thread starter Thread starter wyp8riot
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As far as emergency baptism, the West allows any person, including a non-baptized person, to baptize in an emergency situation (i.e. imminent death). In the East, only baptized persons can baptize in an emergency situation. In this way, I think that the Eastern view may be similar to the LDS view, as far as the traditional (or at least Catholic) view of baptism conferring the “priesthood of the faithful” (in contrast to the “ministerial priesthood”), which means that in the Eastern view, some sort of priesthood is required for someone to baptize in emergency, even if it is the “priesthood of the faithful” instead of the “ministerial priesthood”.
As is often the case, eastern Catholics and Orthodox are closer to our positions than western Catholics. We of course have no need for “emergency” baptism since we believe you may be baptized after you are dead. And of course we have different divisions of the Priesthood as well with different levels of duties assigned.
 
“Once and for all” refers to Jesus’ suffering and death, not to the Sacrifice. Heb 9:25-26
That’s not what it says in Hebrews. In Hebrews it says there is no longer need for priests to offer daily sacrifice.

And yes of course Jesus’ sacrifice was once and for all.
 
I totally respect that. I am glad you have what makes you feel the spirit.
Thanks, I am glad too. Sure took me a while, though. Wish I coulda come to the place that I’m at now a lot sooner. Oh well, better late than never.
Of course I think you will eventually be “Mormon”, but maybe not in this life! 😃
Well, this doesn’t surprise me that you believe this. Though if you knew me personally, and if you were to have witnessed how utterly miserable I was when I was hanging out in LDS circles, and how much I suffered in that context, (despite the nice people, despite all my prayers, etc) you would probably be placing your bets on “next life” rather than “this one.”

In all seriousness, I’d like to clarify two things.

Why do you think that I, specifically, will eventually be a Mormon? I’m curious what things I’ve said on CAF that would make you think that?

Second, what does it mean, exactly to “be a Mormon” in the next life? I assume that it would start w/the acceptance of all temple work done by proxy. Does “be a Mormon” in the next life mean that you are in the CK? Is that the only place that one will find true Mormons (regardless of their affiliation in this life). Is a person who is Mormon in this life always Mormon in the next?

Of course, I happen to not believe in the idea that Jesus, or God, is a Mormon…but nor do I believe that they are “Catholic” for that matter.
 
Thanks, I am glad too. Sure took me a while, though. Wish I coulda come to the place that I’m at now a lot sooner. Oh well, better late than never.

Well, this doesn’t surprise me that you believe this. Though if you knew me personally, and if you were to have witnessed how utterly miserable I was when I was hanging out in LDS circles, and how much I suffered in that context, (despite the nice people, despite all my prayers, etc) you would probably be placing your bets on “next life” rather than “this one.”

In all seriousness, I’d like to clarify two things.

Why do you think that I, specifically, will eventually be a Mormon? I’m curious what things I’ve said on CAF that would make you think that?

Second, what does it mean, exactly to “be a Mormon” in the next life? I assume that it would start w/the acceptance of all temple work done by proxy. Does “be a Mormon” in the next life mean that you are in the CK? Is that the only place that one will find true Mormons (regardless of their affiliation in this life). Is a person who is Mormon in this life always Mormon in the next?

Of course, I happen to not believe in the idea that Jesus, or God, is a Mormon…but nor do I believe that they are “Catholic” for that matter.
Yep, I agree.

I believe that those who are truly listening to the spirit will find the path which will bring then closest to Christ- and it may even be more than one path. But I think that we are all different enough that God teaches us differently.

But I do believe there is one path which is the best which if we continue to seek and follow the spirit, we will all end up on eventually. Of course I think that the church which represents that path on this earth is the LDS church but I have no problem with others truly believing that they have found the “best” path for them. I am sure it probably is the best path for them if they have truly sought it and listened to the spirit.

I think if we all had this attitude we would get along a lot better, and this is actually the overall position of my church.

We believe that those who seek keep progressing in this life and the life to come, and eventually if we continue on the path we will all “end up in the same place” as it were.
 
Ok who wants to explain to me why this: (empahsis added)
Hebrews 7:
26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
means that priests have to daily re-present Christ’s sacrifice?

Note that this is post 482- I think I will have to refer to it often, since I have already quoted this scripture now four times- with no direct response.

Just tell me why it does NOT say what it explicitly and literally says, that there is no need to offer up daily sacrifice any more.
 
It doesn’t say what you say it says. It says He (the high priest in vs. 26) doesn’t need to offer it up, not that “there is no need” for it “any more.”
peace
I don’t think you are correct.

Ok let’s really look at this verse, and I will even look at a Catholic translation, and see how the footnote provided does not address what is being said.
usccb.org/nab/bible/hebrews/hebrews7.htm
26
It was fitting that we should have such a high priest: holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, higher than the heavens.
27
He has no need, as did the high priests, to offer sacrifice day after day, 20 first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did that once for all when he offered himself.
Notice it is saying that Christ “has no need” (present tense) to offer SACRIFICE day after day AS DID THE HIGH PRIESTS (past tense) because Christ did that once for all when he offered himself.

Notice that the phrase “AS DID THE HIGH PRIESTS” is in past tense- that means that BEFORE Christ, the high priests needed to offer sacrifice, but NOW they do not.

And now look at the footnote, footnote 20

usccb.org/nab/bible/hebrews/hebrews7.htm#foot20
20 [27] Such daily sacrifice is nowhere mentioned in the Mosaic law; only on the Day of Atonement is it prescribed that the high priest must offer sacrifice . . . for his own sins and then for those of the people (Lev 16:11-19). Once for all: this translates the Greek words ephapax/hapax that occur eleven times in Hebrews.
So what is this scripture referring to then, this daily sacrifice which no longer needs to be done? The commentary is missing the point entirely.

The main point is that priests no longer need to offer sacrifice, period.
 
This I think I could understand because I think Jews take this symbolically since they have no concept (unless I am wrong) of “grace”.
The Haggadah used for the Passover seder says “In every generation one is obligated to regard himself as personally delivered out of Egypt, as it is said: You shall tell your child on that day, it is because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt. It was not only our fathers whom the Holy One redeemed, but us with them, as it is written: He brought us out from there so that he might take us to the land which he promised to our fathers.” Throughout the observance, it is repeatedly “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt but HASHEM our God took us out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm,” and “Blessed are You, HASHEM our God, King of the universe, Who redeemed us and redeemed our ancestors from Egypt,” and “You removed us, HASHEM our God, from the land of Egypt and You redeemed us from the house of bondage,” etc. Words can’t do justice to what it’s like to participate in the Passover seder. :eek:

Regarding grace in Judaism, cf. this article.
I obviously didn’t catch it- was that the reference to post 431 or whatever it was?
As far as I can tell, the first time I referred to Hebrews directly on this thread was in post #409 on Friday. And I’ve done it many times since.
Ok who wants to explain to me why this…means that priests have to daily re-present Christ’s sacrifice?
“For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.”

Christ has no need to offer many sacrifices (verse 27) because he himself is both perfect priest and perfect victim (verse 26). He offers himself once and only once (verse 27): “he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption… by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified” (9:12, 10:14). This single, perfect sacrifice offered to the Father in heaven, never to be repeated, is the one Christ makes present to us through the divine liturgy.

“Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself… Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near… you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood [of the covenant] that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel,” (9:24-26, 10:19-25, 12:22-24).

Christ our High Priest presents his perfect sacrifice to the Father in heaven, and this is the single sacrifice into which we are drawn when we gather together in the Heavenly Jerusalem.
Just tell me why it does NOT say what it explicitly and literally says, that there is no need to offer up daily sacrifice any more.
I will not tell you there is need for daily sacrifices, because that would be contrary to the Catholic faith. There is only one sacrifice of the new covenant, the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ. He offers himself to the Father in heaven, and we participate in that heavenly liturgy. 🙂
 
Notice it is saying that Christ “has no need” (present tense) to offer SACRIFICE day after day AS DID THE HIGH PRIESTS (past tense) because Christ did that once for all when he offered himself.

Notice that the phrase “AS DID THE HIGH PRIESTS” is in past tense- that means that BEFORE Christ, the high priests needed to offer sacrifice, but NOW they do not.
We agree. There are absolutely no more sacrifices of goats and calves and such, because there is no need of them. Christ our High Priest has offered himself to the Father in heaven, and this is the single sacrifice in which we participate.
 
The Haggadah used for the Passover seder says “In every generation one is obligated to regard himself as personally delivered out of Egypt, as it is said: You shall tell your child on that day, it is because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt. It was not only our fathers whom the Holy One redeemed, but us with them, as it is written: He brought us out from there so that he might take us to the land which he promised to our fathers.” Throughout the observance, it is repeatedly “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt but HASHEM our God took us out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm,” and “Blessed are You, HASHEM our God, King of the universe, Who redeemed us and redeemed our ancestors from Egypt,” and “You removed us, HASHEM our God, from the land of Egypt and You redeemed us from the house of bondage,” etc. Words can’t do justice to what it’s like to participate in the Passover seder. :eek:
:bowdown2:

Wow, what a connection THAT is between Eucharist and Passover. You’ve enriched me, thank you.
 
:bowdown2:

Wow, what a connection THAT is between Eucharist and Passover. You’ve enriched me, thank you.
Hey- you are the one to ask

How would you describe that connection between Jews and the first passover?

Are you “there” symbolically, mystically, or what word would you use? How “real” is it?
 
Ok let’s really look at this verse, and I will even look at a Catholic translation, and see how the footnote provided does not address what is being said.
usccb.org/nab/bible/hebrews/hebrews7.htm

Notice it is saying that Christ “has no need” (present tense) to offer SACRIFICE day after day AS DID THE HIGH PRIESTS (past tense) because Christ did that once for all when he offered himself.

Notice that the phrase “AS DID THE HIGH PRIESTS” is in past tense- that means that BEFORE Christ, the high priests needed to offer sacrifice, but NOW they do not.

And now look at the footnote, footnote 20

usccb.org/nab/bible/hebrews/hebrews7.htm#foot20

So what is this scripture referring to then, this daily sacrifice which no longer needs to be done? The commentary is missing the point entirely.

The main point is that priests no longer need to offer sacrifice, period.
This question has come up on several different threads. Is it so difficult to understand that that there is only ONE sacrifice, not daily sacrifices? We enter into the one sacrifice of Jesus; this one sacrifice is made present to us, daily, in the sacrifice of the Mass. Aspirant’s explanation is superb and I can’t imagine anything else that needs to be explained if one is intellectually honest enough to consider Paul’s words in this light.
 
Hey- you are the one to ask

How would you describe that connection between Jews and the first passover?

Are you “there” symbolically, mystically, or what word would you use? How “real” is it?
There is indeed a sense that “this is for YOU, just as much as it was for your ancestors”. Aspirant’s post reminded me of this, I’d forgotten as I haven’t been to a seder in the last few years.

That said, I am unsure whether there is a specific way Jews believe about that. It probably varies from person to person, and I’d betcha there could be a difference depending on the traditions (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, etc). I wish I could be of more help here, but I wasn’t a particularly observant Jew prior to my conversion.
 
Wow, what a connection THAT is between Eucharist and Passover. You’ve enriched me, thank you.
From the rising of the sun to its setting, HASHEM’s Name is praised.
(From age to age You gather a people to Yourself, so that from east to west a perfect offering may be made to the glory of Your Name.)

Blessed are You, HASHEM our God, King of the universe, Who brings forth bread from the earth.
(Blessed are you, LORD, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the Bread of Life.)

Blessed are You, HASHEM our God, King of the universe, Who creates the fruit of the vine.
(Blessed are you, LORD, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this wine to offer, fruit of the vine and work of human hands. It will become our Spiritual Drink.)

The compassionate One! May He cause us to inherit that day which is altogether good, that everlasting day, the day when the just will sit with crowns on their heads, enjoying the reflection of God’s Majesty-- and may our portion be with them! The compassionate One! May he make us worthy to attain the days of Messiah and the life of the World to Come!
(Father, in Your mercy grant also to us, Your children, to enter into our heavenly inheritance in the company of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, and your apostles and saints. Then, in Your Kingdom, freed from the corruption of sin and death, we shall sing Your glory with every creature through Christ our LORD, through whom You give us everything that is good.)

❤️
 
This question has come up on several different threads. Is it so difficult to understand that that there is only ONE sacrifice, not daily sacrifices? We enter into the one sacrifice of Jesus; this one sacrifice is made present to us, daily, in the sacrifice of the Mass. Aspirant’s explanation is superb and I can’t imagine anything else that needs to be explained if one is intellectually honest enough to consider Paul’s words in this light.
There is no need for the mass- that is the point. There is no need for a re-presentation of a sacrifice.
 
There is indeed a sense that “this is for YOU, just as much as it was for your ancestors”. Aspirant’s post reminded me of this, I’d forgotten as I haven’t been to a seder in the last few years.

That said, I am unsure whether there is a specific way Jews believe about that. It probably varies from person to person, and I’d betcha there could be a difference depending on the traditions (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, etc). I wish I could be of more help here, but I wasn’t a particularly observant Jew prior to my conversion.
I understand.

You can see how good a Catholic I was!
 
There is no need for the mass- that is the point. There is no need for a re-presentation of a sacrifice.
Yes there is–Jesus commanded it when He said “Do this in memory of me” to his “inner circle”, the Apostles–His priests that He just made. We went over that “memory” is more like in the Jewish seder than in our sitting back “recalling” something that happened in history. And Holy Orders (the priesthood) is another Sacrament giving God’s grace.

And remember that it is not a re-sacrificing because Jesus’ great sacrifice never ended Remember that Revelations speaks of Jesus as the Lamb who is (present tense) slain.

Now, if I recall correctly, there appeared consternation that the Mass is not connected with Jesus’ atonement for sins. Well, yes it is. The Mass is our “Passover” from the death of sin to life in God. At the Mass, we are allowed to see Jesus’ great sacrifice for us (by the power of God that the priest is able to call down) but there is more. At the epiclesis, gifts of bread and wine are turned into the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus (just as Jesus said in John, chapter 6). We take this Sacrament that of course gives life and grace–the Eucharist–into our bodies. (In the Passover, it was not enough for the Jews that wanted to be saved to just kill the lamb and put it’s blood on their doorposts, they had to eat the lamb too–this was discussed by Dr. Scott Hahn–so it really is no surprise that at our Passover, we too eat the Lamb.) At the Mass, we, who are prepared (having received the Sacraments of Baptism and Confession), get to participate in the Sacrament of the Eucharist and without the Mass we would not have this Sacrament. Of course, our Eastern Catholic brethren call these Sacraments “Mysteries”.

Now here I think that there is a problem between your belief system and ours. If I understand yours correctly, you believe that everyone is “saved” (resurrected–get to live with God) while we believe that Jesus’ great Sacrifice made it possible for people to live with God–to have the grace to always do God’s will. In that respect, it is the Sacrament of Baptism, (as given to us by Jesus) that first gives us all the grace to do God’s will and be able to live in heaven (where Revelations tells us nothing unholy shall enter.) Of course, we recognize that we are only human and fail (aren’t able to keep our pristine Baptismal garment, our soul, pristine). At that time we have yet another Sacrament that gives God’s grace, Jesus gave us the Sacrament of Confession in which He remits our wrong doings, according to our sincerity, and again makes our Baptismal garment–our soul–pristine, so it is not harmful to receive Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity into our bodies (remember, that we need to be because God is holy and nothing unclean can be with Him.)

I hope this is of help.
 
There is no need for the mass- that is the point. There is no need for a re-presentation of a sacrifice.
I would say there is no need for a bloody sacrifice of the type made by the high priests in the temple. A re-presentation in an un-bloody manner of the once, for all sacrifice of Christ is most certainly not that, IMHO.

peace
 
I would say there is no need for a bloody sacrifice of the type made by the high priests in the temple. A re-presentation in an un-bloody manner of the once, for all sacrifice of Christ is most certainly not that, IMHO.

peace
I am trying to see how it can be the same and yet different, and imo that has not yet been explained. It still is contradictory how it can be both. Sometimes it is said to be the same and other times it is said to be different
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top