LDS and Catholic Differences

[dianaiad]

Still, very weird way to think.

Perhaps there are Catholics who think this way. It wouldn’t be the first time that I’m wondering what the hell people are thinking, while they’re thinking the same about me.

Which is why I have just given up attempting to get you to understand the difference between ‘sacred’ and ‘secret’ in regard to Temple matters. Most people would ‘get’ that analogy. If you don’t, you don’t…

and since you don’t, I have no clue what analogy WOULD illustrate it for you.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Really? WE aren’t the ones who think that sex is ‘just sex’ and that marital relationships are fair game for girlfriend chat sessions. That actually surprised the heck out of me. I rather thought that Catholics and Mormons had more in common in this area than that; that sex is a vital and important…and private and sacred…part of marital life. That’s why I used it as an example, because I honestly thought that y’all thought as highly of this aspect of marriage as we do.

It is, therefore, not US who are 'crossing the line." I guess I have to apologize for trying this analogy. I had no idea I was going to be walking into an edition of “Playboy.” I was, in fact, attempting, by pointing out how special this part of marriage is, to get Rebecca to understand that some things simply belong to those for whom they are for, and are nobody else’s business. I was wrong.

I said nothing that was not in answer to what you asked. So if it was “Playboy”, you were the one asking the questions.

You are disappointed that you didn’t shock me I guess.

Catholics believe marriage is sacred. Sex is a part of marriage. Sex is also a very normal part of adult life. I’m not sorry I’m not all bottled up about something that is very normal and natural!

 

[lax16]

Of course we emphasize relationships. Our faith emphasizes families more than any other faith I know of on the planet. Certainly it does so more than any other Christian group I know of. We are, as far as I am aware, the only group that actually comes right out and says that 'Families are forever." We marry for time 'and all eternity."

I’m a widow…but when I die, I fully expect my husband to be waiting for me, and he is still MY HUSBAND. His death did not mean a divorce, the way it does for Catholics and every other Christian out there who 'marry until death do you part." Death did not part us, except temporarily and physically.

Since families are based on male/female relationships, and since we believe that family unity is absolutely vital to our futures mortal and eternal, how ELSE should we deal with things?

You really don’t know much about us at all, do you?

I’m glad you brought this up because I have a question.
When Mormons die, do they have their own planet or kingdom?
When a Mormon family is sealed, then the children go and get married and sealed to their children, etc. in the end is everybody together in one place…or does everybody get their own planet/kingdom?
It seems like if everybody gets sealed to each other, they would all end up together in the long run?

ps I live in Utah, I know more than you think

 

[RebeccaJ]

Which is why I have just given up attempting to get you to understand the difference between ‘sacred’ and ‘secret’ in regard to Temple matters. Most people would ‘get’ that analogy. If you don’t, you don’t…

and since you don’t, I have no clue what analogy WOULD illustrate it for you.

I wonder what analogy you use for children…try that one maybe.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actually, Rebecca, you HAVE presented yourself as an expert on Mormonism, quite a few times.

Not really. I join in a conversation, and I do point out where mormons are glossing over, you know, white-washing. It is something that you (the general you) do.

I know you find it annoying, but to sit here and watch the lying by omission isn’t something I can do. There are times I try.

Or the make believe that mormons never taught or believed X, when you did, and have.

 

[lax16]

Really? WE aren’t the ones who think that sex is ‘just sex’ and that marital relationships are fair game for girlfriend chat sessions. That actually surprised the heck out of me. I rather thought that Catholics and Mormons had more in common in this area than that; that sex is a vital and important…and private and sacred…part of marital life. That’s why I used it as an example, because I honestly thought that y’all thought as highly of this aspect of marriage as we do.

It is, therefore, not US who are 'crossing the line." I guess I have to apologize for trying this analogy. I had no idea I was going to be walking into an edition of “Playboy.” I was, in fact, attempting, by pointing out how special this part of marriage is, to get Rebecca to understand that some things simply belong to those for whom they are for, and are nobody else’s business. I was wrong.

How is one person’s opinion about anything true for all Catholics, diana?

You know nothing about me, or millions of other Catholics regarding this issue.

Yes, I think your post was over the line, very tasteless, and certainly not something I would let my kids read. (Yes, my kids love CAF).

 

[dianaiad]

Oh now, that is just not so. And only shows how freaking weird your thought process is to me.

When I am kneeling in a our Blessed Sacrament Chapel, the most sacred place I can think to be, I’m not thinking this is just like sex. Sorry.

No…and I don’t think that the Temple is ‘just like sex,’ either. The Temple is ‘just like’ the Temple.

However, most people find that truly sacred things…things that are held holy to them and not to be exposed to demeaning comments or blasphemy or denigration…are best kept sacred by keeping them private. You do NOT 'cast your pearls before swine, lest they turn again, and rend you." there was a very good reason that Jesus made that statement, and to us, Temple matters are a really good example of pearls you don’t cast before swine.

…and you don’t cast pearls anywhere there MIGHT be swine, either. If you haven’t seen what we have to sometimes walk through to even GET TO a Temple, perhaps you don’t get exactly the sort of swinishness we know we would be exposed to if we decided to debate folks about it, but I have.

and frankly, we all know what would happen here. I had a friend who posted the baby pictures of her first child on Facebook…and cops came to her door a year later asking her why she put pictures of her children on a child porn site. they confiscated her computer, Social services took her kids for a few days…it was a nightmare for her entire family until her computer records proved that she’d been 'hacked." I wonder; does THAT analogy get through?

Suffice it to say that she posts no pictures on any social networking site any more…and suffice it to say that we will not discuss Temple matters with anybody outside Temple walls. We want to KEEP that sacred place sacred, both in the place, and in our thoughts and spirits. We can’t do that if we feed pearls to the swine…and that’s what we would be doing. Even if most of the people we talk to would NOT be puggish, it only takes a few.

And quite frankly, Rebecca, while THIS site might not have as many oinkers as others, it has sufficient.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Diana…you are making this more strange.

But anyway, you are only going further into a rabbit hole that I don’t want to follow.

Good night.

 

[dianaiad]

I’m glad you brought this up because I have a question.
When Mormons die, do they have their own planet or kingdom?
When a Mormon family is sealed, then the children go and get married and sealed to their children, etc. in the end is everybody together in one place…or does everybody get their own planet/kingdom?
It seems like if everybody gets sealed to each other, they would all end up together in the long run?

ps I live in Utah, I know more than you think

You need to make up your mind. You can’t 'know more than * think" and still claim to know nothing about Joseph Smith or the Journal of Discourses or anything else.

…and if you know enough to ask about ‘getting your own planet’ and that old saw about sealing everybody to everybody else, then you know a LOT more than you claim you do, and most of it is from anti-Mormon sources.

Look, first, we do not believe that we will ‘get our own planets.’ We believe that we will be ‘heirs and joint-heirs’ with Christ and have everything He does. Follow that line of thought to its logical conclusion and what you do NOT get is 'our own planets." In fact, you will not find a single Mormon source that claims we will. Every reference to that claim is from an anti-Mormon source. Every. Single. One.

When I get good and tired of the stupidity, I respond with 'no…I’m shooting for my own universe, thank you very much."

However, that’s not a probable option either.

As to sealing…yes, we believe that a man and wife will be physically together for eternity, but just as I am my children’s mother…and their living in entirely different states and households does not make me any less their mother, so does sealing children to parents mean that they must be physically together. IF that’s true, then we would all be living with Adam, would we not? As it happens, my parents live with me, but they didn’t always do so, and they were none the less my parents when we did NOT live in the same home.

Now you; you have parents, right? Living or dead, living with you or elsewhere, living together or apart…does where they live affect the FACT that they are your parents, that your mother gave birth to, or adopted, you?

I have to admit that those who ask this particular question really don’t think things through very well.*

 

[dianaiad]

How is one person’s opinion about anything true for all Catholics, diana?

You know nothing about me, or millions of other Catholics regarding this issue.

I don’t see you understanding the analogy or not defending Rebecca’s view of it, Lax. In fact, I don’t see anyone else doing so, either.

Yes, I think your post was over the line, very tasteless, and certainly not something I would let my kids read. (Yes, my kids love CAF).

From this can I assume that you DO have the same view of sex in marriage that I do…that it is special, personal, private and sacred between the married couples? That indeed sex is never ‘just sex…’ and is God’s gift to His children to be a part of marriage relationships?

If so, then perhaps you and those who agree with you can begin to understand the concept of ‘sacred’ vs. ‘secret.’

Yes, we all know the mechanics…but we know that what happens between married people should stay between married people, and not be shared with the girlfriends.

Rebecca thinks I’m wierd for thinking this way. You tell me that my saying so is “tasteless and over the line.”

Well, if it is, I apologize. I certainly won’t try it again. It was about the only thing I could think of that MIGHT resonate with a religious married person as something held too sacred and important to one’s own life to share and debate with just anyone out there. I guess I was wrong…at least to a few of you, nothing is too personal, private, special and sacred for that.

As for your attitude, I think that’s just as odd; Rebecca thinks sex is ‘too natural,’ and ‘just sex,’ and she’ll talk about it to her friends, and you simply think that it’s too dirty…even when I was talking about how it is NOT something to be spoken of to anybody but your spouse.

Either way, it’s too big a land mine for me to stand on any longer. Sorry about that one. I certainly learned something. If the mods don’t ban me for this one, trust me, I won’t revisit the idea.

 

[lax16]

You need to make up your mind. You can’t 'know more than * think" and still claim to know nothing about Joseph Smith or the Journal of Discourses or anything else.

…and if you know enough to ask about ‘getting your own planet’ and that old saw about sealing everybody to everybody else, then you know a LOT more than you claim you do, and most of it is from anti-Mormon sources.

Look, first, we do not believe that we will ‘get our own planets.’ We believe that we will be ‘heirs and joint-heirs’ with Christ and have everything He does. Follow that line of thought to its logical conclusion and what you do NOT get is 'our own planets." In fact, you will not find a single Mormon source that claims we will. Every reference to that claim is from an anti-Mormon source. Every. Single. One.

When I get good and tired of the stupidity, I respond with 'no…I’m shooting for my own universe, thank you very much."

However, that’s not a probable option either.

As to sealing…yes, we believe that a man and wife will be physically together for eternity, but just as I am my children’s mother…and their living in entirely different states and households does not make me any less their mother, so does sealing children to parents mean that they must be physically together. IF that’s true, then we would all be living with Adam, would we not? As it happens, my parents live with me, but they didn’t always do so, and they were none the less my parents when we did NOT live in the same home.

Now you; you have parents, right? Living or dead, living with you or elsewhere, living together or apart…does where they live affect the FACT that they are your parents, that your mother gave birth to, or adopted, you?

I have to admit that those who ask this particular question really don’t think things through very well.*

Well, another abusive answer.
When I said I know more than you think, I was referring to “real life stuff” that happens in the lives of families here in Utah.

As far as the JoD, I never heard of it until you brought it up and I then googled it. (Boy, is that a sore subject for you!)

As far as Joseph Smith is concerned, I wanted to hear more of an LDS perspective than the stuff that is written about him. My LDS friends don’t discuss him with me (maybe they don’t discuss him at all, I don’t know).

I know our LDS friends got sealed with their parents, then they get married and got sealed with their kids, etc. Despite what you say, I don’t understand it. (Also, I heard one of my friends say about her sister-in-law “I so don’t want to spend eternity with HER!”) Once again, I don’t understand how she would be with her sister-in-law?

One might suggest I ask my LDS friends these questions, however they are really struggling with their faith right now and don’t have much nice to say about it at all.

If you see this as such a stupid question, you need to understand this is a very different concept of eternal life than we have as Catholics.

Perhaps there will be someone in the future who can answer my questions and not insult me.

Until then, goodbye.

 

[RebeccaJ]

ugh. Diana. Stop interpreting what I say. Stop trying to paint me as something I’m not, out of a sense to cover your tracks.

I said, marriage is sacred, sex is part of marriage. I said it is private. Never did I say sex is “just sex” and something that is ok outside of marriage. That is not something I believe, or even implied.

If I talk about my life with friends, it is with friends. I would never make a list like the one you were after in your post on a public internet site. I would never even post the questions you type out there, unless it was specifically related to the topic of a forum…you know…all about women or married couples, or something along those lines. And CLOSED to minors. As you recall, I said I could pm you the answers if you like.

You can’t try to project your warped view of sex onto me and attribute that warp to something that I never said, believe or implied.

 

[dianaiad]

ugh. Diana. Stop interpreting what I say. Stop trying to paint me as something I’m not, out of a sense to cover your tracks.

I said, marriage is sacred, sex is part of marriage. I said it is private. Never did I say sex is “just sex” and something that is ok outside of marriage. That is not something I believe, or even implied.

Actually, you did say it was ‘just sex,’ or something that is the same thing:" I dont consider sex as sacred. " “I’ve never been bashful about talking about sex.” and “It’s sex, Diana. There isn’t anything secret about it, unless you’re 10 years old and nobody has taught you anything yet.” and “talking about sex doesn’t in the least bother me. But I can tell it sure bothers you.” …and “I can send you a PM if you like, and really, you’re comparing the Mormon Temple to sex. I think I’ll use that some time, see what happens.”

Oh, and I love this part: " lol. I don’t think you’d want me in your temple walls Diana…when I don’t believe something, I tend to not hide it very well. Y’all would kick me out PDQ."

You can find all this in post # 773, if you don’t remember.

and I did NOT say that you said it was something that was 'OK outside of marriage." Talk about 'interpreting what I say!" You DID say that it was ok to talk about outside marriage. You’re the one who mentioned girlfriends.

If I talk about my life with friends, it is with friends. I would never make a list like the one you were after in your post on a public internet site.

Well, when I discuss Temple matters, it’s with friends, too…and in a place I choose. Yet you seem to want us to discuss something we hold that private and sacred out in the open on a 'public internet site." You are now backpedaling. By the way, go back and read that first post. I made it VERY plain that putting it on a public internet site was the very last thing I wanted you to do. Ididn’t want to know in private, either. It was meant to be an analogy of something I THOUGHT might resonate with you, since of course I assumed that you were a happily married woman with similar ideas of the importance of this aspect of marriage that I have. It just seemed…well, I wouldn’t talk about my sex life with my husband with anybody…I can’t imagine someone who would…perhaps that will explain the difference between ‘secret’ and 'sacred…" as something that one CAN find out about and discuss, but that one simply doesn’t WANT to, or feels that it is anybody else’s right to make me discuss it–or that anybody can legitimately criticise me for telling them that it’s none of their business?

cont. on next post.

 

[dianaiad]

cont. from previous post…

I would never even post the questions you type out there, unless it was specifically related to the topic of a forum…you know…all about women or married couples, or something along those lines. And CLOSED to minors. As you recall, I said I could pm you the answers if you like.

And I made it very clear in the first post that I would NOT like. That wasn’t the point. The point was that I thought there was one thing that most everybody would agree is nobody else’s business but their own, and that you could use that analogy to finally understand our point of view regarding something else that we think is nobody’s business but our own.

…and nothing I wrote was objectionable. Especially, I would think, to someone who would have no problem discussing it with friends. Especially to someone who says that 'talking about sex deon’t in the least bother me. But I can tell it sure bothers you."

Why, if you are now telling me how objectionable my post was, and how you would NEVER 'post such questions" on a site like this, did you completely ignore that first post which stated "IN which case, of course, I expect you to tell me all about it. I hope you won’t, mind you, because if you really DON’T get the analogy, I still do and I don’t want you to for the same reasons you shouldn’t want to. "

If you are now insulted past all bearing because I made this analogy, just how do you think I’m feeling as you dismiss my very sincere beliefs about Temple matters and their sacred nature as “speshul.?” …in spite of the fact that it has to be obvious, even to you, that in terms of what we feel is sacred, we MEAN it? No amount of mockery by you and those who think as you do is going to change that. Yes. It is special. It is sacred.

Suffice it to say that you mentioned a specific area that you think is the most sacred place you know about. You know that I would never make fun of your feelings there, right? There is no way that I would dismiss your obvious care and veneration for the place and the spirit you find there as ‘speshul.’

so I used something that was merely …none of my business, and hopefully special and private to you in order to see if you could, finally, GET it.

Didn’t work. Won’t try it again…and frankly, if the mods nail me for it I think I’ll be relieved, because I’m VERY tired of this very one way permission to mock things.

You can’t try to project your warped view of sex onto me

Hey, lady. YOU are the one who offered to PM me about them even after I specifically told you I didn’t want you to. As to 'warped view of sex…" I think it’s obvious that my view of sex is that it is between married couples (and no, I never ONCE hinted that you thought otherwise!), that it is special…(oh, gee, there’s that word again) a gift from God for men and women to share, an essential and enjoyable part of marriage that should be held in the respect and honor it deserves; for procreation, for communication, and for mutual pleasure–and that it’s nobody’s business but that of the married partners what they do, when they do it or how. If that is a ‘warped’ view of sex, I sure as the devil do NOT want to know what you think a ‘non-warped’ view is!

… and attribute that warp to something that I never said, believe or implied.

You just did that to me, Rebecca. Again. I did NOT accuse you of believing that sex was permissable outside marriage. I dare you to find anything that even hints at that. As for what you implied, I only quote you. Read into those quotes whatever implication you wish, but do NOT read into my stuff accusations and opinions that were never there.

As for me, I’m tired. I"m going to bed.

And…I quit. I’m sorry, m…I’m leaving YOU this minefield. I’m outa here, at least for awhile. It’s not that I’m a coward (ok, it’s partly that…) it’s because I’m not going to be able to type for awhile.

Perhaps I’ll be calm enough to be reasonable in a week or so.

Maybe.

 

[mfbukowski]

bukowski’s anti-Catholicism shines through now and then.

“We’re so persecuted!!!” :crying::crying::crying:

 

[mfbukowski]

This is just filth.

I am going to leave you in your mire too.

 

[aspirant]

[Leviticus 16] is the Lord speaking to Moses, telling him and Aaron what to do. While we know NOW what was done by Moses and Aaron then, I don’t see anywhere where God said 'oh, and tell everybody that this is what you are doing, eh?"

You don’t see it because you haven’t yet read it in context. These things were, in fact, written down to be known by all the people. From the time of Moses to the present, it has been considered a mitzvah to read the Torah aloud to the community and to be present at its reading.

When the time of Moses’ death was drawing near, when the Israelites were about to cross into the Promised Land, “Moses wrote this Torah and gave it to the priests, the sons of Levi who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and to all the elders of Israel. Then Moses commanded them, saying, 'At the end of every seven years, at the time of the year of remission of debts, at the Feast of Sukkoth, when all Israel comes to appear before the LORD your God at the place which He will choose, you shall read this Torah in front of all Israel in their hearing. Assemble the people, the men and the women and children and the alien who is in your town, so that they may hear and learn and fear the LORD your God, and be careful to observe all the words of this Torah. Their children, who have not known, will hear and learn to fear the LORD your God, as long as you live on the land which you are about to cross the Jordan to possess.”

Every man, woman, and child was to be assembled to hear the reading of Torah, even the non-Israelites living among them. What the High Priest did in the Holy of Holies was no secret. It was written and read aloud to everyone, so that everyone could know.

When the people returned to the Promised Land from exile in Babylon, one of the first things Ezra did was reestablish the public reading of Torah to all the people: “And all the people gathered as one man into the square before the Water Gate. And they told Ezra the scribe to bring the Scroll of the Torah of Moses that the LORD had commanded Israel. So Ezra the priest brought the Torah before the assembly, both men and women and all who could understand what they heard, on the first day of the seventh month.”

The frequency of public reading actually increased after this, most congregations both in Israel and in the diaspora reading the Torah aloud in cycles of one to three years.

what we do is not secret but known to our people.

All of your people-- all men, women, and children-- and any non-Mormons who live in your town, too?

 

[mfbukowski]

How is one person’s opinion about anything true for all Catholics, diana?

Or for Mormons for that matter. Is the Pope’s opinion true for all Catholics?

Is RebeccaJ’s opinion true for all Mormons?

 

[mfbukowski]

“Moses wrote this Torah and gave it to the priests, the sons of Levi who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and to all the elders of Israel. Then Moses commanded them, saying, 'At the end of every seven years, at the time of the year of remission of debts, at the Feast of Sukkoth, when all Israel comes to appear before the LORD your God at the place which He will choose, you shall read this Torah in front of all Israel in their hearing. Assemble the people, the men and the women and children and the alien who is in your town, so that they may hear and learn and fear the LORD your God, and be careful to observe all the words of this Torah. Their children, who have not known, will hear and learn to fear the LORD your God, as long as you live on the land which you are about to cross the Jordan to possess.”

I am curious where this quote came from. Reference please.

It is interesting that it says that Moses, not God, wrote the Torah

Edit: that’s ok - I found it- Deut 31: 9

 

[RebeccaJ]

Is RebeccaJ’s opinion true for all Mormons?

I’m not a mormon.