LDS & Catholic Comparison

[DerekD]

I hope I’m not too intrusive by giving you my answer or thoughts on your first question.

Simply put, Mormons believe you have to partake in the Proper ordinances performed by someone with the proper authority i.e. the Priesthood authority. These ordinances include Baptism by immersion, Confirmation (receiving the Holy Ghost), The Endowment, and Celestial Marriage (Marriage in the Temple). LDS doctrine state these are necessary ordinances in order to inherit the Highest degree of Glory in the Celestial Kingdom, where you live in the Presence of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and The Holy Ghost.

So participating in these “Saving” ordinances performed through the Priesthood you can go to heaven.

That’s how I understood it when I was Mormon.

If this is true; sounds like a legalistic religion.

 

[DerekD]

A person who will not believe the Bible will not start believing it because of the Book of Mormon.

And people who do believe the Bible always reject the Book of Mormon.

So your “second witness” thing really makes no sense.

This is why any religion that 1) claims authority for itself based on some divine origin not found in Scripture is a red flag and 2) has extra Biblical revelation is a red flag as well; this is why true disciples stick with what is known as divine revelation, which is the Protestant Bible. Any other claim of divine origin cannot not be proven.

 

[zerinus]

Hmmmm good question. All I can do is give you my point of view.
I was born and raised Mormon, served a full time mission to South Africa, married in the Temple. My Seven sisters and my Two Brothers are Mormon, my Mother is Mormon, and my Father no longer is. All of my sisters Husbands converted to the LDS faith.

As a Mormon Missionary I viewed Catholics as people who didn’t have a full understanding of the Gospel. I saw the Catholic Church as the Church of Christ in apostasy, mostly because this is what was taught to me from a young age. I should note that ALL other Churches were in a state of apostasy not just the Catholic Church. Growing up my Mother was a big fan of Bruce R. McKonckie (sp?) and in his 1st edition of Mormon Doctrine he stated the Catholic Church was the Church of the devil, so even though I had held that all other religions were apostate the Catholic Church throughout a lot of Mormon communities gets special attention due to the early teachings that it is the Church of the Devil.

Although it is true that such sentiments has been expressed by some (a small number) of LDS leaders in the past; I believe I am correct in saying that it has never been the official doctrine of the LDS Church. And likewise, although you are correct in saying that that doctrine was taught in the first edition of Bruce R. McConkie’s book; you overlooked to mention that it was removed from the later editions of his book at the insistence of the leadership of the Church, by whom he was censured for many of the doctrines he taught in his book.

I held a certain arrogant view that people outside the LDS church were not very well versed in scripture and didn’t fully understand what God had in store for them.

That may indeed have been your “arrogant view,” but certainly not a view that the Church encourages its members to have towards people of other faiths.

I was taught through obedience of the Gospel and partaking in “life saving” ordinances I was to one day enter the Celestial Kingdom or highest degree of Glory to live with Both God and Jesus Christ.

True.

Through time and Progression I would one day become a God and have my own creations to exercise dominion over.

“Becoming God” yes; “ruling over my own creations” is not official doctrine of the Church. Any doctrine that cannot be substantiated by the standard works of the Church is not strictly speaking the official doctrine of the Church.

I was taught that God was once a man like me, that like me he lived on a world somewhere and through time and intellectual progression he became God like his God before him.

That doctrine was indeed taught by Joseph Smith, for which reason it acquired wide acceptance in the Church early on in its history, and I dare say it still does today; however it still falls in the realm of speculation, since it is not confirmed by the standard works of the Church; and you might be interested to know that the former President of the Church Gordon B. Hinckley, in a couple of interviews he gave to the public press, expressed doubts concerning its validity.

Later I learned that there are many Gods and many creations, but I should focus my heart and mind on the God of this world and his Son Jesus Christ.

LDS certainly do believe in the plurality of gods, and that men can become gods (as did the early Christians, by the way); but there is nothing in LDS doctrine that leads us to conclude that there is a deity above God the Father who is worthy of our worship. According to LDS scripture, God the Father is, and has always been, the supreme deity of heaven, greater than whom there is not and has never been any other God, to Whom all other beings, including gods, pay homage and reverence.

I was taught that J.Smith was not only a Prophet but the head of this dispensation. That save Christ himself J.Smith has done more for the Salvation of Mankind than anyone else.

True.

Through J.Smith the Gospel was restored, and the precious and simple parts of the Gospel have returned to the earth through his works, translating the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price.

True.

I view Catholics with a certain degree of pity because they did not have the fullness of the “Everlasting Gospel”.

I don’t; and you shouldn’t have!

I went on a Mission to South Africa, I studied the Bible, I fell in Love with the Old Testament, and the New Testament. While on my mission through study with the Bible and the Book of Mormon I began to see some disturbing evidence that suggested the Book of Mormon was not what I had initially believed it to be.

I have been studying the Bible and the Book of Mormon probably for more years than you; and I certainly have never had any reason to doubt the veracity of the Book of Mormon.

Continued … /

 

[zerinus]

/… Continued

I did research on the early Church Leaders and the way they lived their lives, and what doctrines they taught as “Divine Truth” from the Pulpit. Needless to say it wasn’t long after my Mission I left the Mormon Church.

I see the Mormon Church as the Church established by a man for his own selfish reasons. I see the teachings, some if not most are good, but then I see the other things snuck in with the good teachings, Plural Marriage, Blood Atonement, as I studied more and more of the Bible the concept of God and the plurality of Gods the more I realized this was a religion developed through the mind of J.Smith and not something divine.

You are entitled to your opinion of course; but you have not given me any valid reasons to change my mind. I have no doubts that Joseph Smith was a prophet and the Book of Mormon is true.

I found truth in the Catholic Church. Now I look at Mormons a group being led astray and in many cases not facing the reality of their beliefs due to fear, fear of reprisals from their families and the Mormon communities in which they live.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion; but let me assure you that no such “fear” is keeping me a Mormon.

I find they are for the most part unwilling to look at the inconsistancies of what is being taught to them, and they are more than willing to blindly follow the Word of a Church leader as opposed to their own study and intellect. Harsh sounding I know, but the truth is harsh sometimes.

You can be as “harsh” as you like; but if it is not backed up by anything substantive, then as far as I am concerned it amounts to nothing more than hot air. So far you have singularly failed to produce any substantive arguments in support of your thesis. It is just “accusations,” with no substance to back it up. You will have to do a lot better than that if you want to persuade me that your way of thinking is the right one.

I respect my Family in their beliefs, I respect the beliefs of my LDS friends, but I pray one day they’ll see the LDS chruch for what it trully is.

I also respect you beliefs; but I pray that one day you will see the LDS Church for what it really is—the only true and living Church of God on earth today.

 

[zerinus]

I hope I’m not too intrusive by giving you my answer or thoughts on your first question.

Simply put, Mormons believe you have to partake in the Proper ordinances performed by someone with the proper authority i.e. the Priesthood authority. These ordinances include Baptism by immersion, Confirmation (receiving the Holy Ghost), The Endowment, and Celestial Marriage (Marriage in the Temple). LDS doctrine state these are necessary ordinances in order to inherit the Highest degree of Glory in the Celestial Kingdom, where you live in the Presence of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and The Holy Ghost.

So participating in these “Saving” ordinances performed through the Priesthood you can go to heaven.

That’s how I understood it when I was Mormon.

Then you didn’t understand Mormon doctrine very well. What “takes you into heaven” is first faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and in His Atonement; second the repentance of all your sins; third obedience to all the ordinances of God, which includes baptism and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost; and forth faithfulness in keeping all of God’s commandments for the rest of your life.

 

[zerinus]

The LDS Church does put Christ at the center; however the teachings of Christ in the Book of Mormon differ substantially than from Christ in the Bible. . . . In fact you may say, this is my opinion not LDS teaching, you would almost have to have a stronger testimony of J.Smiths legitimacy as a Prophet and his works within the restoration. This puts your real focus on belief not on the teachings of Christ but on whether or not J.Smith was who he claimed to be.

That is just rubbish. It is garbage. It is trash. It is not true. Like I said, your posts consist of wild accusations with nothing of substance to back it up.

Without J.Smith there is no Book of Mormon, there is no Restoration, there is no legitimacy of the Mormon’s claim that they are the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, and they resemble and are the Church of Christ which was established from the time of Adam, which Christ reestablished in his time. Through various apostasies the need for restoration developed, J.Smith being the final restoration or dispensation head.

True.

So as a Mormon your testimony of J.Smith has to be stronger than that of Christ in order for you to adhere to the teachings.

Rubbish; not true!

 

[RebeccaJ]

This is why any religion that 1) claims authority for itself based on some divine origin not found in Scripture is a red flag and 2) has extra Biblical revelation is a red flag as well; this is why true disciples stick with what is known as divine revelation, which is the Protestant Bible. Any other claim of divine origin cannot not be proven.

What is exactly is a Protestant Bible and where did it come from?

 

[Marie5890]

What is exactly is a Protestant Bible and where did it come from?

I was wondering the same thing.

 

[mrparker]

The LDS Church does put Christ at the center; however the teachings of Christ in the Book of Mormon differ substantially than from Christ in the Bible. Also in order to believe and be a faithful Mormon, you not only have to have a testimony of Christ but also a testimony of Joseph Smith. In fact you may say, this is my opinion not LDS teaching, you would almost have to have a stronger testimony of J.Smiths legitimacy as a Prophet and his works within the restoration. This puts your real focus on belief not on the teachings of Christ but on whether or not J.Smith was who he claimed to be.
Without J.Smith there is no Book of Mormon, there is no Restoration, there is no legitimacy of the Mormon’s claim that they are the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, and they resemble and are the Church of Christ which was established from the time of Adam, which Christ reestablished in his time. Through various apostasies the need for restoration developed, J.Smith being the final restoration or dispensation head.
So as a Mormon your testimony of J.Smith has to be stronger than that of Christ in order for you to adhere to the teachings.
That’s just my two cents worth.

I see what you are trying to say here Kdesiel, as you will often hear many LDS say “i have a testimony of the prophet Joseph Smith” this is a mistake on their part, in that we only have faith in and place our testimonial belief in Christ. However, just as you may have a “witness” for lack of a better word, that your leaders were inspired in establishing which manuscripts of the teachings of the Apostles were inspired and necessary to keep for the Church to study, we may have a “witness” that Joseph Smith was chosen of God to restore the gospel to its original teachings.

Conclusion: If you cannot trust your Pope(s) and leaders and have a belief that they are inspired, their decisions lose credibility, and thus their teachings lose credibility.
Similarly, if i cannot trust that Joseph was in fact a prophet, i cannot trust the things he teaches. But i do trust in his teachings, and the validity of the Book of Mormon due to my own personal ‘private’ revelation from the Holy Spirit.

I feel many member mistakenly place too much emphasis on the man Joseph Smith. He was but an instrument in the Hand of God like unto all prophets from the time of Adam.

If this is true; sounds like a legalistic religion.

I’m not sure EXACTLY what you are implying by this, but you might say we are legalistic if you are meaning that we hold a strict importance to the ordinances that we believe to be ordinances of salvation as it seems one of your faith does.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if not baptized Catholic one will proceed to hell, is this true?

Likewise, if one does not recieve the proper ordinances by the proper authority in the LDS church, we believe they will belong to a degree of glory other than the highest.

This is why any religion that 1) claims authority for itself based on some divine origin not found in Scripture is a red flag and 2) has extra Biblical revelation is a red flag as well; this is why true disciples stick with what is known as divine revelation, which is the Protestant Bible. Any other claim of divine origin cannot not be proven.

1. All of the old testament prophets were given authority based on divine origin that had not been written in scripture at the time of their receiving, and so i believe it to be the same.
2. many of the things that were revealed to the apostles of the early church were not written in the Old Testament, then deemed as “red flags” and so i believe it to be the same
3. Catholics believe in the “Protestant Bible?” What am i to understand from this?

 

[mrparker]

I would like to pose the same question to you as I have “the Court”; if I ask a LDS what must I do to get to heaven, what should be the correct response according to the taching of LDS? Thanks in advance.

Doesn’t the Bible say that Christians are sons of God and “gods”? John 10 and Psalm 82?

Please refer to our Articles of Faith: scriptures.lds.org/en/a_of_f/1

If this does not help, let me know.

 

[TheosisM]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if not baptized Catholic one will proceed to hell, is this true?

No, Catholics believe that it is possible for non-Catholics to go to Heaven, though the fullness of the Truth is only found in the Catholic Church.

1. Catholics believe in the “Protestant Bible?” What am i to understand from this?

I’m not sure what he meant by this, but the bibles Catholics read as scripture all contain books that we consider to be inspired that are not found in “protestant” bibles such as the KJV. Some Protestant bibles may include these books under the title of “apocrypha”.

 

[PaulDupre]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if not baptized Catholic one will proceed to hell, is this true?

Absolutely not. Where did you get such an idea?

 

[mrparker]

No, Catholics believe that it is possible for non-Catholics to go to Heaven, though the fullness of the Truth is only found in the Catholic Church.

I was afraid that i might have been mistaken. Thank you for explaining! So then what enables a Catholic to go to heaven? And what qualifies one for Hell in your belief?

I’m not sure what he meant by this, but the bibles Catholics read as scripture all contain books that we consider to be inspired that are not found in “protestant” bibles such as the KJV. Some Protestant bibles may include these books under the title of “apocrypha”.

Ah i see, Thank you again.

 

[TheosisM]

I was afraid that i might have been mistaken. Thank you for explaining! So then what enables a Catholic to go to heaven? And what qualifies one for Hell in your belief?

A Catholic goes to Heaven through grace alone. Through faith in Jesus Christ, we participate in the life of Christ in various ways, chief among these are the sacraments. Through the sacraments, we turn towards God, and align ourselves with God. Through the sacraments, we are born again, receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, receive forgiveness for our sins, receive Jesus into our lives in a special way (the Eucharist), etc. The sacraments are the doors to real relationships with God. Because of this, it is inappropriate for a Catholic to approach the sacraments as magic spells that, if they do this and this and this, they can go to Heaven. Instead, we must have faith in Jesus Christ, in His sacrifice for us, and that the sacraments are ways that we participate in the atonement and His resurrection. This is normative, meaning, Catholics believe that God set up a single means of salvation, establishing His one and only Church, which has the fullness of Truth. However, as I mentioned, non-Catholics can be saved as well, although the normative, most correct, most “pure” means of salvation is found only in the Catholic Church. Outside of it, we can’t say for sure, since we don’t believe that God wanted thousands of other churches, if that makes sense.

Hell is for those that desire a life apart from God. If you live your mortal life apart from God, then you will live eternity apart from God. On the other hand, we can’t judge others and say, “oh, you’re an atheist, you’re off to Hell”. While that may very well be the case, we leave this up to God, since we can’t judge why they are an atheist, or what’s really in their hearts. Catholics do not believe that God sends people to Hell, or predestines people to Hell, but that people send themselves there.

Ah i see, Thank you again.

No problem.

 

[mrparker]

A Catholic goes to Heaven through grace alone. Through faith in Jesus Christ, we participate in the life of Christ in various ways, chief among these are the sacraments. Through the sacraments, we turn towards God, and align ourselves with God. Through the sacraments, we are born again, receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, receive forgiveness for our sins, receive Jesus into our lives in a special way (the Eucharist), etc. The sacraments are the doors to real relationships with God. Because of this, it is inappropriate for a Catholic to approach the sacraments as magic spells that, if they do this and this and this, they can go to Heaven. Instead, we must have faith in Jesus Christ, in His sacrifice for us, and that the sacraments are ways that we participate in the atonement and His resurrection. This is normative, meaning, Catholics believe that God set up a single means of salvation, establishing His one and only Church, which has the fullness of Truth. However, as I mentioned, non-Catholics can be saved as well, although the normative, most correct, most “pure” means of salvation is found only in the Catholic Church. Outside of it, we can’t say for sure, since we don’t believe that God wanted thousands of other churches, if that makes sense.

So technically a Mormon might be saved into the Heaven that you believe in?

Catholics do not believe that God sends people to Hell, or predestines people to Hell, but that people send themselves there.

Although i cannot say i know for sure this is doctrinally taught, as i cannot think of a reference, but I do share this exact belief with you! I am happy to find the common ground!

 

[TheosisM]

So technically a Mormon might be saved into the Heaven that you believe in?

Yes, when we say that it is possible for non-Catholics to be saved, that includes Mormons.

Although i cannot say i know for sure this is doctrinally taught, as i cannot think of a reference, but I do share this exact belief with you! I am happy to find the common ground!

 

[IHeartAquinas]

So technically a Mormon might be saved into the Heaven that you believe in?

The short answer is yes, it would be possible for Mormons to one day proceed to Heaven from Purgatory.

The nitty gritty answer is that, probably, many Mormons will not be going to heaven. I forget the exact doctrine, but it basically states that if you have been shown the fullness of truth and choose to reject it, you choose to reject God and Christ and are destined for Hell. Meaning if a Mormon has been given the option of accepting the fullness of truth trough the Catholic Church and has openly and purposefully rejected it without coercion or conspiracy from another source, that Mormon, unless he or she repents, confesses, and converts from Mormonism before they die, will surely go to Hell.

Given that some Mormons have reported extreme family and community pressure to remain in the LDS faith even after they have thought to leave it, I think the question of a Mormon’s salvation in the eyes of the Catholic Church is quite a tough pickle to chew and figure out.

 

[TheosisM]

Given that some Mormons have reported extreme family and community pressure to remain in the LDS faith even after they have thought to leave it, I think the question of a Mormon’s salvation in the eyes of the Catholic Church is quite a tough pickle to chew and figure out.

Which is why it’s impossible to figure out and best left up to the Judge, God.

And yes, if one is shown the fullness of Truth, and knows that this is the Truth, and turns away from it, then Hell may very well be a reality. I think it’s best, for the purposes of this thread, to not get into that, because it’s a lot more complex then simply “you were shown the Catholic Church and then decided to become Mormon/Baptist/Hindu/etc., so you’re off to Hell”, though I’m not saying that that is what you were saying. Suffice to say that it is possible for non-Catholics to be saved, but that the fullness of truth is found only in the Catholic Church, so it is…“easier” (can’t think of a good word, but basically the full means of life in Christ, as He intended it, is only found in the Catholic Church).

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1037 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:621*

*1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity. *

 

[PaulDupre]

The short answer is yes, it would be possible for Mormons to one day proceed to Heaven from Purgatory.

The nitty gritty answer is that, probably, many Mormons will not be going to heaven. I forget the exact doctrine, but it basically states that if you have been shown the fullness of truth and choose to reject it, you choose to reject God and Christ and are destined for Hell. Meaning if a Mormon has been given the option of accepting the fullness of truth trough the Catholic Church and has openly and purposefully rejected it without coercion or conspiracy from another source, that Mormon, unless he or she repents, confesses, and converts from Mormonism before they die, will surely go to Hell.

Given that some Mormons have reported extreme family and community pressure to remain in the LDS faith even after they have thought to leave it, I think the question of a Mormon’s salvation in the eyes of the Catholic Church is quite a tough pickle to chew and figure out.

From my personal experience, verified by what I see on this forum, most Mormons are so heavily conditioned to their way of thinking that they are actually incapable of processing information outside the LDS mindset. JWs seem to be the same way. I’m not saying consciously unwilling, but rather neurologically unable to understand non-LDS thinking. It looks like they are being deliberately obtuse, but I no longer think so. Only when the person sees on his own that the LDS organization is a sham, do the blinders come off and there is sudden clarity of thought and the ability to think critically and objectively.

So, Mormons not liberated from that mindset may not be accountable enough to merit hell.

I experienced that sudden break from the conditioning when after much study and anguish I suddenly (VERY suddenly) realized one day that it was all a crock. Suddenly it was like walking out of a fog, and I could see clearly. It was a wonderfully startling experience. I can’t really describe it adequately. Has anyone else had that experience of wonderful sudden liberating clarity when breaking from Mormonism?

 

[Xavierlives]

Through time and Progression I would one day become a God and have my own creations to exercise dominion over.

“Becoming God” yes; “ruling over my own creations” is not official doctrine of the Church. Any doctrine that cannot be substantiated by the standard works of the Church is not strictly speaking the official doctrine of the Church.

If you can show me “Becoming God” from the Bible, I’d be most appreciative.