LDS: What do you know about your Heavenly Mother? Would you like to know more?

[BYUChemAlum]

Isn’t that what I said?

Clearly I was emphasizing what was said and providing an LDS response.

 

[SteveVH]

No, he is still Creator. The question is whether He created from nothing or from pre-existing materials. “Organizing” and “Creating” are not mutually exclusive. A painter creates a painting using things that already exist, for example. Also the potter and clay.

No, He is Creator in LDS theology. And even if we entertain the idea that God is a “pro-creator”, that is still “creation”.

We believe that God is not dependant upon anything else in order to bring something into existence. Pro-creation, by is very nature is a cooperative effort. In other words, we are the instruments of God’s creation of human beings, we are the paint brushes. He is the painter. Big difference. God is not a creator, He is the Creator. We are not. He could bring anyone of us into existence without our cooperation if that is what He decided to do. Indeed, this is exactly what He did with Adam and Eve. From that point forward, however, because we are made in His image, we would become one with our spouse and the result of becoming one with each other is new life. We are a reflection of the Holy Trinity, the image of God who is, in His deepest reality, a family; Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Mary played a completely unique role in the history of mankind. She was chosen by the Father, through the power of the Holy Spirit, to bring His Son into the world. Mary then, becomes our Mother as well if we are indeed the Body of Christ, as Paul assures us we are. No other human being occupies this place, either in heaven or on earth. If Christ is our King, then she is the Queen Mother and holds this place in heaven for eternity. She can rightly be referred to as our heavenly mother, the Queen of heaven and earth.

 

[SteveVH]

Clearly I was emphasizing what was said and providing an LDS response.

Ok. No problem.

 

[Peter_John]

Originally Posted by xixxvmcm85 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Eh… I could see the similarities, but I think the devil’s in the details. There really is no Mormon equivalent for the intercession of Saints. They do not win us favor with God. They might be used by God in some revelatory sense, but all for the sake of God’s plan and not necessarily and directly our benefit. As you properly mention, the LDS do not direct any prayers to any Saints, the least of which the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Thank you, this is very true.

Actually Mormons teach that we cannot be saved without our dead, and they cannot be saved without us. They may not “pray” to their past dead, but it is completely consistent with the religion to consider faithful relatives who have passed away and ask what to do, It is doctrine that Joseph Smith in particular is working in Heaven to advance the cause of the saints here on Earth, “Mingling with gods he can plan for His brethren.” That sounds like the same concept as communion of saints to me, especially when it starts involveing testimonies of encountering deceased loved ones in the Temple, or having dreams of them when they give advice in a crisis. T

he Church literature is full of such stories going all the way back to its founding. The concept of Moroni, being an Ancient American prophet who had passed away, delivering sacred scripture to Joseph Smith, and instructing him in various spiritual matters, the visits of John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John – these would all fall under communion of saints in Catholic belief. I am not saying that the teachings regarding it are all identical, but the basic concept is the same. Tehy are all seen as part of one congregationof the faithful, and death is no barrier for them in fulfilling missions the Lord has assigned.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

We believe that God is not dependant upon anything else in order to bring something into existence. Pro-creation, by is very nature is a cooperative effort. In other words, we are the instruments of God’s creation of human beings, we are the paint brushes. He is the painter. Big difference. God is not a creator, He is the Creator. We are not. He could bring anyone of us into existence without our cooperation if that is what He decided to do. Indeed, this is exactly what He did with Adam and Eve. From that point forward, however, because we are made in His image, we would become one with our spouse and the result of becoming one with each other is new life. We are a reflection of the Holy Trinity, the image of God who is, in His deepest reality, a family; Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

What I was responding to was what seemed to be a distinction between “creator” and “organizer”, with the implication being that to be “creator”, that means that the creation must have been done from nothing. My response on that point was that “creation” does not carry the implication that it was from nothing, and that “organizing” is a subset of the term “creating”, and an “organizing” God can rightly be called Creator.

For further LDS thoughts on the issue, perhaps you are interested in this article, as well as this blog post.

Mary played a completely unique role in the history of mankind. She was chosen by the Father, through the power of the Holy Spirit, to bring His Son into the world. Mary then, becomes our Mother as well if we are indeed the Body of Christ, as Paul assures us we are. No other human being occupies this place, either in heaven or on earth. If Christ is our King, then she is the Queen Mother and holds this place in heaven for eternity. She can rightly be referred to as our heavenly mother, the Queen of heaven and earth.

Yes, thank you, I understand that perspective.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Originally Posted by xixxvmcm85 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
Eh… I could see the similarities, but I think the devil’s in the details. There really is no Mormon equivalent for the intercession of Saints. They do not win us favor with God. They might be used by God in some revelatory sense, but all for the sake of God’s plan and not necessarily and directly our benefit. As you properly mention, the LDS do not direct any prayers to any Saints, the least of which the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Actually Mormons teach that we cannot be saved without our dead, and they cannot be saved without us. They may not “pray” to their past dead, but it is completely consistent with the religion to consider faithful relatives who have passed away and ask what to do, It is doctrine that Joseph Smith in particular is working in Heaven to advance the cause of the saints here on Earth, “Mingling with gods he can plan for His brethren.” That sounds like the same concept as communion of saints to me, especially when it starts involveing testimonies of encountering deceased loved ones in the Temple, or having dreams of them when they give advice in a crisis. T

he Church literature is full of such stories going all the way back to its founding. The concept of Moroni, being an Ancient American prophet who had passed away, delivering sacred scripture to Joseph Smith, and instructing him in various spiritual matters, the visits of John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John – these would all fall under communion of saints in Catholic belief. I am not saying that the teachings regarding it are all identical, but the basic concept is the same. Tehy are all seen as part of one congregationof the faithful, and death is no barrier for them in fulfilling missions the Lord has assigned.

Peter, I don’t think either of us is disagreeing with your view as far as “communion of saints” goes. What xixxvmcm85 is referring to is the specific practice of intercession of saints, i.e. the practice of asking them to pray for us.

 

[SteveVH]

What I was responding to was what seemed to be a distinction between “creator” and “organizer”, with the implication being that to be “creator”, that means that the creation must have been done from nothing. My response on that point was that “creation” does not carry the implication that it was from nothing, and that “organizing” is a subset of the term “creating”, and an “organizing” God can rightly be called Creator.

For further LDS thoughts on the issue, perhaps you are interested in this article, as well as this blog post.

Thanks BYU, I’ll take a look. I don’t want to get to far off on that discussion as I think it may lead us off topic, although it does have to do with whether or not a “Heavenly Mother” would be required in order for Heavenly Father to have children.

Yes, thank you, I understand that perspective.

And what is your opinion of that perspective?

 

[xixxvmcm85]

Actually Mormons teach that we cannot be saved without our dead, and they cannot be saved without us. They may not “pray” to their past dead, but it is completely consistent with the religion to consider faithful relatives who have passed away and ask what to do, It is doctrine that Joseph Smith in particular is working in Heaven to advance the cause of the saints here on Earth, “Mingling with gods he can plan for His brethren.” That sounds like the same concept as communion of saints to me, especially when it starts involveing testimonies of encountering deceased loved ones in the Temple, or having dreams of them when they give advice in a crisis. T

he Church literature is full of such stories going all the way back to its founding. The concept of Moroni, being an Ancient American prophet who had passed away, delivering sacred scripture to Joseph Smith, and instructing him in various spiritual matters, the visits of John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John – these would all fall under communion of saints in Catholic belief. I am not saying that the teachings regarding it are all identical, but the basic concept is the same. Tehy are all seen as part of one congregationof the faithful, and death is no barrier for them in fulfilling missions the Lord has assigned.

I’m specifically narrowing my scope to the intercession of the Saints. Yes, the LDS believe in visions and even resurrected beings (or just the spirits thereof) coming to Earth, and yes there exists a good deal of personal experiences floating around in Mormon folklore. What the LDS do not do, however, is ask for any sort of mediation from these individuals (or at least they aren’t supposed to). A Mormon just diagnosed with cancer doesn’t go off asking Nephi to plead with God to cure him, even if he were privileged with having Nephi physically visit him here on Earth.

Now if you want to limit the Mariology you wish to present the LDS here to nothing more than an acknowledgement that she was a very pious Saint, likely in God’s greatest of favors, a model of sorts we might emulate, and a spiritual sister whom we can hope to share company with in the hereafter, I don’t think many LDS would object to that already. That’s only the tip of the iceberg though when it comes to how we understand our Mother. We know that she can actually be the subject of our petitions, that she carries our concerns to the feet of her Son, and that devotion to her equates to indirect devotion to the God whom she bore. The LDS don’t share these sympathies and as far as I know as a former LDS, it will take coming to a consensus on intercession before any headway can be made.

 

[xixxvmcm85]

Also, Peter John, I’m not sure what you meant by this:

Actually Mormons teach that we cannot be saved without our dead.

I don’t mean to derail your thread here; it’s just that I have no experience of this myself.

 

[Peter_John]

Our “hesitance” in discussing the matter, as mentioned in the previous Heavenly Mother thread, is that nothing really has been revealed about her [yet]. Therefore, anything else is mere speculation.

and the reason given for this is that God does not want us to disrespect her.

Please, allow me to introduce you to your Mother in Heaven:

1. According to the Book of Mormon, Jesus is both the Father and the Son, the Father by virtue of being the Creator, the Son by virtue of his incarnation (though it does not use that word). He is also the Father by virute of adopting us through the atonement.
2. Mormons teach that Jesus is our brother.
3. Mormons teach that He must comply with all the ordinances expected of any person to get in the Celestial Kingdom, using baptism as an example.

4)Mormons teach that these ordinances include sealing to parents.

1. Jesus must therefore be sealed to Mary as His mother, for time and all eternity.

What role does that give Mary in Heaven? If you consider Jesus a Prince, she must be the Queen. If Jesus is the King, she must be the King mother. Since He is both, She is also both.

I refer to the Old testament for a standard of the role of the Queen Mother. When Bathsheba was the wife of the King (David) she had to ask permission to enter his court. When she was the mother of the king (Solomon) she needed no permission.

Mary therefore, even by the numerated standards of Mormonism provided, serves as our Mother in Heaven. She has access to the Lord unmatched by anyone else. Mormons teach that those in the Celestial Kingdom enjoy the same sociality as we do here, except that it is coupled with eternal glory which we do not now enjoy. That means that Jesus’ relationship to Mary in the Celestial Kingdom should be the same as it was on Earth. On Earth, as the wedding feast at Cana shows, she could sway His judgment. According to this she should have the same role in the Celestial Kingdom.

I do not describe these things as a validation of LDS doctrine, but to show how according to those doctrines Mary’s celestial role is as our Mother in Heaven, and for some reason they diminish this in their teachings.

The question is, why your leaders tell you there is nothing to know about our Mother in Heaven, and why they consider that Joseph Smith did more than Mary for the Salvation of humanity.

It should be no harder to pray “Hail, Mary, full of Grace,” than it is to pray, “Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven,” which Mormons do all the time acording to D&C 25:12.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

Thanks BYU, I’ll take a look. I don’t want to get to far off on that discussion as I think it may lead us off topic, although it does have to do with whether or not a “Heavenly Mother” would be required in order for Heavenly Father to have children.

Sure. Also, I don’t think it is an issue of “requirement”, but of simply how we believe it to be.

And what is your opinion of that perspective?

I think that it is based on a number of assumptions and views that of course do not cross between the faiths. For example: “no other human being occupies this place, either in heaven or on earth. If Christ is our King, then she is the Queen Mother and holds this place in heaven for eternity. She can rightly be referred to as our heavenly mother, the Queen of heaven and earth.” Well of course, if she is the Queen Mother, meaning that as the mother of the King, she is titled Queen Mother, and no one else holds that position, since Jesus was born to the virgin Mary.

On the other hand, LDS are not referring to that aspect, but to the spouse of God the Father, who we term Heavenly Mother. So, what I am getting from your statement is that because Mary is Queen Mother if we apply certain Old Testament cultural viewpoints to Jesus being the King, then no one else can be termed Heavenly Mother (is this a title Catholics officially use to refer to Mary?). I don’t think that follows, since “Queen Mother” (Mary) and Heavenly Mother (spouse of the Father) would be referring to two different stations.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

It should also be noted that Elder Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the Church had no problem referring to Mary as “regal queen”.

 

[Peter_John]

Also, Peter John, I’m not sure what you meant by this:

I don’t mean to derail your thread here; it’s just that I have no experience of this myself.

It involves their interpretationof the last few verses of Malachi, to avoid a tangent.

I agree that they do not believe in the same DETAILS about communion of Saints as we do. They believe in the same CONCEPT. Their concept of intercession is that those Priesthood holders already in the next life continue the work of proseletyzation and Church organization that happens here. Joseph Smith in partciular works in direct contact with Jesus and leaders we would call the Saints for our benefit. That may not be the same method of intercession as Catholics believe in, but it is till a form of intercession.

The real point of the thread is that Mormons believe they have a Mother in Heaven about whom they know nothing. We know who our Mother in Heaven is, and would like to introduce her. I am not saying she is the same individual they believe she is. I am saying she is their real Mother in Heaven, and we know plenty about her.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Sure. Also, I don’t think it is an issue of “requirement”, but of simply how we believe it to be.

I think that it is based on a number of assumptions and views that of course do not cross between the faiths. For example: “no other human being occupies this place, either in heaven or on earth. If Christ is our King, then she is the Queen Mother and holds this place in heaven for eternity. She can rightly be referred to as our heavenly mother, the Queen of heaven and earth.” Well of course, if she is the Queen Mother, meaning that as the mother of the King, she is titled Queen Mother, and no one else holds that position, since Jesus was born to the virgin Mary.

On the other hand, LDS are not referring to that aspect, but to the spouse of God the Father, who we term Heavenly Mother. So, what I am getting from your statement is that because Mary is Queen Mother if we apply certain Old Testament cultural viewpoints to Jesus being the King, then no one else can be termed Heavenly Mother (is this a title Catholics officially use to refer to Mary?). I don’t think that follows, since “Queen Mother” (Mary) and Heavenly Mother (spouse of the Father) would be referring to two different stations.

I see what your saying, but where does this Heavenly Mother arrive in scripture? Or its simply LDS theory and teaching?

So in this concept is Christ, God, to the LDS?

 

[BYUChemAlum]

and the reason given for this is that God does not want us to disrespect her.

Please, allow me to introduce you to your Mother in Heaven:

1. According to the Book of Mormon, Jesus is both the Father and the Son, the Father by virtue of being the Creator, the Son by virtue of his incarnation (though it does not use that word). He is also the Father by virute of adopting us through the atonement.
2. Mormons teach that Jesus is our brother.
3. Mormons teach that He must comply with all the ordinances expected of any person to get in the Celestial Kingdom, using baptism as an example.

4)Mormons teach that these ordinances include sealing to parents.

1. Jesus must therefore be sealed to Mary as His mother, for time and all eternity.

What role does that give Mary in Heaven? If you consider Jesus a Prince, she must be the Queen. If Jesus is the King, she must be the King mother. Since He is both, She is also both.

I refer to the Old testament for a standard of the role of the Queen Mother. When Bathsheba was the wife of the King (David) she had to ask permission to enter his court. When she was the mother of the king (Solomon) she needed no permission.

Mary therefore, even by the numerated standards of Mormonism provided, serves as our Mother in Heaven. She has access to the Lord unmatched by anyone else. Mormons teach that those in the Celestial Kingdom enjoy the same sociality as we do here, except that it is coupled with eternal glory which we do not now enjoy. That means that Jesus’ relationship to Mary in the Celestial Kingdom should be the same as it was on Earth. On Earth, as the wedding feast at Cana shows, she could sway His judgment. According to this she should have the same role in the Celestial Kingdom.

I do not describe these things as a validation of LDS doctrine, but to show how according to those doctrines Mary’s celestial role is as our Mother in Heaven, and for some reason they diminish this in their teachings.

The question is, why your leaders tell you there is nothing to know about our Mother in Heaven, and why they consider that Joseph Smith did more than Mary for the Salvation of humanity.

It should be no harder to pray “Hail, Mary, full of Grace,” than it is to pray, “Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven,” which Mormons do all the time acording to D&C 25:12.

Yes, I already understand the Catholic perspective as to why Mary is termed “Queen of Heaven”, as well as its basis in Old Testament cultural practices. As I mentioned, Elder Holland had no problem referring to her as “regal queen” in a talk he gave years ago.

However, it is a very large leap to go from referring to Mary as Queen Mother to asking her to intercede.

D&C 25:12 says nothing about directing prayers to Joseph Smith. The hymn being referred to contains no petitions to Joseph Smith, in contrast to the Hail Mary.

I am in complete agreement with xixx that there simply is no way to square the intercession of saints with LDS belief. Hymns being prayers does not change that, nor does it change who prayer is to be directed to. D&C 25:12 says that hymns are prayers unto God, not Joseph Smith.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Yes, I already understand the Catholic perspective as to why Mary is termed “Queen of Heaven”, as well as its basis in Old Testament cultural practices. As I mentioned, Elder Holland had no problem referring to her as “regal queen” in a talk he gave years ago.

However, it is a very large leap to go from referring to Mary as Queen Mother to asking her to intercede.

D&C 25:12 says nothing about directing prayers to Joseph Smith. The hymn being referred to contains no petitions to Joseph Smith, in contrast to the Hail Mary.

I am in complete agreement with xixx that there simply is no way to square the intercession of saints with LDS belief. Hymns being prayers does not change that, nor does it change who prayer is to be directed to. D&C 25:12 says that hymns are prayers unto God, not Joseph Smith.

So Mary is a large leap, and Heavenly Mother by your thinkingis not? Wouldn’t it be safe to say, the really only large leap is Heavenly Mother?

 

[Peter_John]

Sure. Also, I don’t think it is an issue of “requirement”, but of simply how we believe it to be.

I think that it is based on a number of assumptions and views that of course do not cross between the faiths. For example: “no other human being occupies this place, either in heaven or on earth. If Christ is our King, then she is the Queen Mother and holds this place in heaven for eternity. She can rightly be referred to as our heavenly mother, the Queen of heaven and earth.” Well of course, if she is the Queen Mother, meaning that as the mother of the King, she is titled Queen Mother, and no one else holds that position, since Jesus was born to the virgin Mary.

On the other hand, LDS are not referring to that aspect, but to the spouse of God the Father, who we term Heavenly Mother. So, what I am getting from your statement is that because Mary is Queen Mother if we apply certain Old Testament cultural viewpoints to Jesus being the King, then no one else can be termed Heavenly Mother (is this a title Catholics officially use to refer to Mary?). I don’t think that follows, since “Queen Mother” (Mary) and Heavenly Mother (spouse of the Father) would be referring to two different stations.

That is who Mormons believe our Heavenly Mother is, but that requires subscribing to the doctrine that we are all co-eternal with God, which is counterintuitive to God’s omnipotence. Therfore, if God is omnipotent we did not exist until our conception – he created every part of us, including the essence of our intelligence – no part of us can exist independent of a truly omnipotent God.

My point is Mormons believe they have a Mother in Heaven, but really know nothign of her. We know our Mother in Heaven, and we want you to as well. She is continually involved in our affairs on Earth.

 

[SteveVH]

Sure. Also, I don’t think it is an issue of “requirement”, but of simply how we believe it to be.

I think that it is based on a number of assumptions and views that of course do not cross between the faiths. For example: “no other human being occupies this place, either in heaven or on earth. If Christ is our King, then she is the Queen Mother and holds this place in heaven for eternity. She can rightly be referred to as our heavenly mother, the Queen of heaven and earth.” Well of course, if she is the Queen Mother, meaning that as the mother of the King, she is titled Queen Mother, and no one else holds that position, since Jesus was born to the virgin Mary.

On the other hand, LDS are not referring to that aspect, but to the spouse of God the Father, who we term Heavenly Mother. So, what I am getting from your statement is that because Mary is Queen Mother if we apply certain Old Testament cultural viewpoints to Jesus being the King, then no one else can be termed Heavenly Mother (is this a title Catholics officially use to refer to Mary?). I don’t think that follows, since “Queen Mother” (Mary) and Heavenly Mother (spouse of the Father) would be referring to two different stations.

Point well taken. We are not trying to equate the Mormon idea of “Heavenly Mother” with the Catholic dogma of Mary, Queen of heaven and earth. Rather I think the point of the topic is to introduce Mormons to who we believe is the true heavenly mother. You are correct that Mary has not been give the title “Heavenly Mother”, though she has been given the title “Mother of God” for the purpose of defining the nature of Jesus Christ. “Heavenly Mother” suggests divinity because we also refer to God the Father as our “Heavenly Father”. We know that Mary is a creature, like us, not divine. We certainly do not believe in a divine Goddess and I would agree that speaking of the two in the same thread may be cause for confusion.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

I see what your saying, but where does this Heavenly Mother arrive in scripture? Or its simply LDS theory and teaching?

Perhaps this article will be helpful to you. In addition to various scriptural interpretations, there are also statements sustained by our authorities, such as Family: A Proclamation to the World, that mention our belief in “heavenly parents”.

So in this concept is Christ, God, to the LDS?

I am sure you are aware that LDS reject the traditional concept of the Trinity. However, we do believe that Jesus Christ is divine, was the God of the Old Testament, and is variously termed “God”, “a God” in our scriptures and literature.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

So Mary is a large leap, and Heavenly Mother by your thinkingis not? Wouldn’t it be safe to say, the really only large leap is Heavenly Mother?

What I’m getting at is that it’s a leap to go from titling Mary “Queen Mother” to asking her to intercede for us. It’s two different doctrinal issues, in my opinion. It’s not just limited to her, for that matter, in LDS theology.