LDS Doctrine of Eternal Progression/Catholic View

[Maverick]

I have been reading about the Mormon doctrine of “Eternal Progression”. As I understand it, a person in this world works to be come a better person throughout his or her entire life. This process continues after death and a person continues to grow and become more God-like after death, until eventually one can become like a God.

I know the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that a person can become like a God through progressing after death, but is there a Church doctrine about striving to become a better person throughout one’s entire life, or perhaps even after death?

 

[soren1]

I have been reading about the Mormon doctrine of “Eternal Progression”. As I understand it, a person in this world works to be come a better person throughout his or her entire life. This process continues after death and a person continues to grow and become more God-like after death, until eventually one can become like a God.

I know the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that a person can become like a God through progressing after death, but is there a Church doctrine about striving to become a better person throughout one’s entire life, or perhaps even after death?

Yes, but it differs from Mormonism at foundational points. I will explain the central difference first, so that what follows will be clear. All spiritual progress is accomplished in Catholicism through grace as an absolute first principle, whereas in Mormonism personal effort is logically and actually prior to grace. Mormon leaders have often taught that “grace alone” is a morally irresponsible doctrine, whereby men seek to place the burden of their own salvation upon God rather than themselves. This criticism requires a presupposition that free human acts require separation from God, for if God moves the will by grace, he is forcing the human being to obey him. Yet this treats God as an extrinsic principle, acting on man from without, rather than an ex nihilo creator, acting from within, using the properties of human nature itself, creatively, so that God literally moves man’s free will. This is an inconceivable proposition for a materialist Mormon, but not for a Catholic. The Mormon criticism as usual assumes materialism in its interpretation of classical Christian doctrine, resulting in an improper and abusive critique. This leads Mormons to believe that they hold a monopoly on believing in personal effort and progress, since they have never understood what the alternative to their own theology actually is.

In the Catholic view, human beings grow in sanctity through freely receiving the grace of God. Good works done as a result of grace yield merit by participating in the cross of Christ. God responds to this merit by moving man’s free will with further grace, resulting n a further attainment of holiness. The ultimate objective in the process is to attain a state of sanctity that imitates Christ. In heaven, man becomes so permeated by grace that he resembles God, not because he has the same nature as God, but for the opposite reason - because grace itself, not part of our nature, brings with it an infusion of the divine nature into us over and above the limited potential of a human nature in itself.

 

[Inishfree]

Excellent post! Thanks for sharing.

 

[Ben_F]

Excellent post! Thanks for sharing.

Me too. Excellent post. God bless.

 

[Maverick]

Thank you for that response, soren1. It is well written and answers my question well.
I had not really thought of it in those terms, the concept of progress in Catholicism through grace, as contrasted to the Mormon view.

As it relates to the afterlife, I was thinking in terms of Mormon Eternal Progression as a parallel to the Catholic concept of purgatory. Purgatory as a purification, a place of temporal punishment, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

As I understand it,In the Mormon view, the process of betterment after death would be eternal progression, this would not be a place of temporal punishment, but would be similar to the Catholic view of purgatory in the continued progressing and betterment after death.

 

[1ke]

Thank you for that response, soren1. It is well written and answers my question well.
I had not really thought of it in those terms, the concept of progress in Catholicism through grace, as contrasted to the Mormon view.

As it relates to the afterlife, I was thinking in terms of Mormon Eternal Progression as a parallel to the Catholic concept of purgatory. Purgatory as a purification, a place of temporal punishment, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

As I understand it,In the Mormon view, the process of betterment after death would be eternal progression, this would not be a place of temporal punishment, but would be similar to the Catholic view of purgatory in the continued progressing and betterment after death.

I think you’ve also missed an important distinction in the LDS doctrine. It is not that we become “like a god” or “like god”. Eternal progression is the teaching that men become an ACTUAL God of their own planet.

 

[SteveVH]

Yes, but it differs from Mormonism at foundational points. I will explain the central difference first, so that what follows will be clear. All spiritual progress is accomplished in Catholicism through grace as an absolute first principle, whereas in Mormonism personal effort is logically and actually prior to grace. Mormon leaders have often taught that “grace alone” is a morally irresponsible doctrine, whereby men seek to place the burden of their own salvation upon God rather than themselves. This criticism requires a presupposition that free human acts require separation from God, for if God moves the will by grace, he is forcing the human being to obey him. Yet this treats God as an extrinsic principle, acting on man from without, rather than an ex nihilo creator, acting from within, using the properties of human nature itself, creatively, so that God literally moves man’s free will. This is an inconceivable proposition for a materialist Mormon, but not for a Catholic. The Mormon criticism as usual assumes materialism in its interpretation of classical Christian doctrine, resulting in an improper and abusive critique. This leads Mormons to believe that they hold a monopoly on believing in personal effort and progress, since they have never understood what the alternative to their own theology actually is.

In the Catholic view, human beings grow in sanctity through freely receiving the grace of God. Good works done as a result of grace yield merit by participating in the cross of Christ. God responds to this merit by moving man’s free will with further grace, resulting n a further attainment of holiness. The ultimate objective in the process is to attain a state of sanctity that imitates Christ. In heaven, man becomes so permeated by grace that he resembles God, not because he has the same nature as God, but for the opposite reason - because grace itself, not part of our nature, brings with it an infusion of the divine nature into us over and above the limited potential of a human nature in itself.

I was getting ready to jump on this. I have nothing to add at this point. This may be the most concise and accurate comparison I’ve ever read. Thank you. :bowdown:

 

[zaffiroborant]

I was getting ready to jump on this. I have nothing to add at this point. This may be the most concise and accurate comparison I’ve ever read. Thank you. :bowdown:

Soren is good, very, very good. I’ve read him/her else where and been “way” impressed.

 

[soren1]

Thank you for that response, soren1. It is well written and answers my question well.
I had not really thought of it in those terms, the concept of progress in Catholicism through grace, as contrasted to the Mormon view.

I should have made more clear, however, that Mormons do have a doctrine of grace, and their teachings on deification depend upon God elevating man through an unearned gift. What must be noted, however, is that this gift is not a supernatural endowment in a proper sense, but an enabling power that allows men to take hold of eternal life (that is, godhood) after they have expended their best efforts. Thus, while Mormons believe grace is a necessary for exaltation, their notion of what is grace is totally different from ours. It is a power that facilitates the achievement of man’s natural potential, rather than elevating him beyond his nature.

As it relates to the afterlife, I was thinking in terms of Mormon Eternal Progression as a parallel to the Catholic concept of purgatory. Purgatory as a purification, a place of temporal punishment, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

As I understand it,In the Mormon view, the process of betterment after death would be eternal progression, this would not be a place of temporal punishment, but would be similar to the Catholic view of purgatory in the continued progressing and betterment after death.

The closest thing the Mormons have to purgatory is spirit prison, which is where unbaptized souls who did not hear the gospel in life reside until they are baptized by proxy in a Mormon Temple. While in spirit prison, unbaptized spirits are visited by the spirits of LDS missionaries who teach them the gospel so that they may freely choose to accept or reject the effects of the proxy baptism. This differs from Purgatory principally in that it is not a purifying experience, in which one pays the price of venial sins, but a place where people are prepared for their initial conversion. In Catholic terms, we would say that LDS spirit prison is a place for converting souls who did not die in a state of grace, whereas Purgatory purifies souls who did. This makes for a very big contrast despite the obvious similarity that each involves progress after death.

 

[soren1]

Soren is good, very, very good. I’ve read him/her else where and been “way” impressed.

Thanks. And by the way, I’m a guy.

 

[Maverick]

Spirit Prison. I have read a little about Mormonism, but that is a new one for me.

It would seem to me that a soul in such a place, at least from the way it sounds, would not have that much of a free choice in whether they accepted or rejected the effects of the proxy baptism.

1ke, the concept of becoming a God and ruling their own planet, that sounds way out there.
This was not mentioned in the latest Time magazine cover story about Mormonism. I’ll can see why the Mormons would not want to highlight this aspect of their religion. (Do Mormons even want to be called Mormons, I thought I read somewhere they found this insulting and wanted to be called members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) .

 

[soren1]

Spirit Prison. I have read a little about Mormonism, but that is a new one for me.

It would seem to me that a soul in such a place, at least from the way it sounds, would not have that much of a free choice in whether they accepted or rejected the effects of the proxy baptism.

That is a very common view, but I think the Mormons have a good response to it. If the Mormons used Catholic terminology, than the proxy baptisms, and all proxy ordinances, would be defined as “provisional.” That is, the effect of the ritual does not force anyone to accept it. Moreover, in spirit prison, souls are not under any constraint to listen to the missionaries, although it is generally understood that the spirit missionaries enjoy very good success, since the very existence of spirit prison demonstrates to people that the Mormon message is true. Still the is no actual constraint placed upon the will any more than in Catholic provisional baptisms.

(Do Mormons even want to be called Mormons, I thought I read somewhere they found this insulting and wanted to be called members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) .

The name “Mormon” has a storied history. It originates from early persecution of Mormons especially in the late 1830’s, when Smith’s followers were labeled “Mormonites” as a perjorative. Over time, however the term shortened to “Mormon” and eventually lost its perjorative content, although it often carried negative connotations in various circles. Because the term has been used for different reasons at different points in history, LDS views of it have varied accordingly. When the term is been used as an insult, they object to it, when it is not, they don’t mind.

In the most recent LDS General Conference this last April, Apostle Boyd K Packer articulated the current view of the word, when he said, “Because of the Book of Mormon, we are frequently called the Mormon Church, a title we do not resent, but it is really not accurate.” He then goes on to explain the theological significance of the Chruch’s true name, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. [See the full text Guided by the Holy Spirit”]here.] The upshot is that “Letter-day Saint” is theolgically more proper than “Mormon,” but they have no problem with either term. This is, I think, a reasonable, moderate view.

 

[Tony888]

I have been reading about the Mormon doctrine of “Eternal Progression”. As I understand it, a person in this world works to be come a better person throughout his or her entire life. This process continues after death and a person continues to grow and become more God-like after death, until eventually one can become like a God.

I know the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that a person can become like a God through progressing after death, but is there a Church doctrine about striving to become a better person throughout one’s entire life, or perhaps even after death?

To keep it simple, the LDS teach that the more Christ like we are in this world, the more like Christ we will be in the next. This view is in-line with Catholic teachings

The LDS also claim more revelation about our pre and post mortal states, which are not covered in Catholic theology. It’s not so much that the Catholic doctrine contradicts the LDS, rather than it’s just not covered so there is nothing official to discuss.

You must also remember that the LDS are more prone to speculate about the unknown than Catholics or most Protestand denominations. Sometimes that speculation is taken as LDS doctrine when it is not.

 

[zaffiroborant]

To keep it simple, the LDS teach that the more Christ like we are in this world, the more like Christ we will be in the next. This view is in-line with Catholic teachings

No it’s not.

The LDS also claim more revelation about our pre and post mortal states, which are not covered in Catholic theology. It’s not so much that the Catholic doctrine contradicts the LDS, rather than it’s just not covered so there is nothing official to discuss.

Well there is no “pre mortal state” and the “post mortal” state is so vastly wrong in LDS “theology” that there is nothing to discuss.

You must also remember that the LDS are more prone to speculate about the unknown than Catholics or most Protestand denominations. Sometimes that speculation is taken as LDS doctrine when it is not.

And some pretty bizarre speculation as come from that, Adam-God, does God have a grandfather on so on.

 

[Tony888]

No it’s not.

Well there is no “pre mortal state” and the “post mortal” state is so vastly wrong in LDS “theology” that there is nothing to discuss.

And some pretty bizarre speculation as come from that, Adam-God, does God have a grandfather on so on.

Zaff,
Are you denying that the ECF taught deification, and that it is still in the Catechism?
That is what I was affirming in my post. I can also back it up.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Zaff,
Are you denying that the ECF taught deification, and that it is still in the Catechism?
That is what I was affirming in my post. I can also back it up.

I am not denying deification/ theosis, I am saying that LDS exhaltaion is not equivalent to theosis, just as the LDS godhead is not equivalent to The Holy Trinity.

 

[Tony888]

I am not denying deification/ theosis, I am saying that LDS exhaltaion is not equivalent to theosis, just as the LDS godhead is not equivalent to The Holy Trinity.

Great, so we agree both religions teach “Christ became man so that Man might become God” but we disagree on fleshed out meaning, mostly around this point

• Catholics believe we are created by God but a different species
• LDS believe we are God’s children and thus the same species

 

[Stephen168]

Are you denying that the ECF taught deification, and that it is still in the Catechism?

What is deification?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Great, so we agree both religions teach “Christ became man so that Man might become God” but we disagree on fleshed out meaning, mostly around this point

• Catholics believe we are created by God but a different species
• LDS believe we are God’s children and thus the same species

God does not have species. As our Creator, He exists outside of any classifications of genus or species.

 

[SteveVH]

Great, so we agree both religions teach “Christ became man so that Man might become God” but we disagree on fleshed out meaning, mostly around this point

• Catholics believe we are created by God but a different species
• LDS believe we are God’s children and thus the same species

This is an excellent example of the lack of understanding of divinity. It is a confusion of both theology and anthropology, not differentiating between the Creator and the creature. And we are only God’s children through adaption, not through procreation. There is only one Son of God who was begotten by the Father. The rest of us are invited into God’s family, but we will never be God. We will share in His divine life through a gift of grace, but we will always remain human and He will always remain divine.