M
mormon_fool
Guest
By the way what is the Catholic belief, official or other wise, on whether the apostle John of Peter, James, and John fame escaped death and could possible still be around somewhere unbeknownst to us?
- Status
J
jimmy
Guest
mormon fool:
I am not sure what you mean by this post, it is structured kind of weird with the “apostle John of Peter”.
Peter was crucified upside down in Rome.
I am not sure what you mean by this post, it is structured kind of weird with the “apostle John of Peter”.
C
catholic-rcia
Guest
**II. THE POWER OF THE KEYS **
**Melchizedek **
http://catholic-rcia.com/pages/Preisthood/priesthood.html
981 After his Resurrection, Christ sent his apostles “so that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations.”(Lk 24:47)
The apostles and their successors carry out this “ministry of reconciliation,” not only by announcing to men God’s forgiveness merited for us by Christ, and calling them to conversion and faith; but also by communicating to them the forgiveness of sins in Baptism, and reconciling them with God and with the Church through the power of the keys, received from Christ:
**(2 Cor 5:18) **
[The Church] has received the keys of the Kingdom of heaven so that, in her, sins may be forgiven through Christ’s blood and the Holy Spirit’s action. In this Church, the soul dead through sin comes back to life in order to live with Christ, whose grace has saved us.
982 There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive. "There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest. Christ who died for all men desires that in his Church the gates of forgiveness should always be open to anyone who turns away from sin.(Mt 18:21-2)
983 Catechesis strives to awaken and nourish in the faithful faith in the incomparable greatness of the risen Christ’s gift to his Church: the mission and the power to forgive sins through the ministry of the apostles and their successors:
The Lord wills that his disciples possess a tremendous power: that his lowly servants accomplish in his name all that he did when he was on earth.
Priests have received from God a power that he has given neither to angels nor to archangels … God above confirms what priests do here below.
Were there no forgiveness of sins in the Church, there would be no hope of life to come or eternal liberation. Let us thank God who has given his Church such a gift.
984 The Creed links “the forgiveness of sins” with its profession of faith in the Holy Spirit, for the risen Christ entrusted to the apostles the power to forgive sins when he gave them the Holy Spirit.
985 Baptism is the first and chief sacrament of the forgiveness of sins: it unites us to Christ, who died and rose, and gives us the Holy Spirit.
986 By Christ’s will, the Church possesses the power to forgive the sins of the baptized and exercises it through bishops and priests normally in the sacrament of Penance.
987 “In the forgiveness of sins, both priests and sacraments are instruments which our Lord Jesus Christ, the only author and liberal giver of salvation, wills to use in order to efface our sins and give us the grace of justification” (Roman Catechism, I, 11, 6).
**Melchizedek **
http://catholic-rcia.com/pages/Preisthood/priesthood.html
981 After his Resurrection, Christ sent his apostles “so that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations.”(Lk 24:47)
The apostles and their successors carry out this “ministry of reconciliation,” not only by announcing to men God’s forgiveness merited for us by Christ, and calling them to conversion and faith; but also by communicating to them the forgiveness of sins in Baptism, and reconciling them with God and with the Church through the power of the keys, received from Christ:
**(2 Cor 5:18) **
[The Church] has received the keys of the Kingdom of heaven so that, in her, sins may be forgiven through Christ’s blood and the Holy Spirit’s action. In this Church, the soul dead through sin comes back to life in order to live with Christ, whose grace has saved us.
982 There is no offense, however serious, that the Church cannot forgive. "There is no one, however wicked and guilty, who may not confidently hope for forgiveness, provided his repentance is honest. Christ who died for all men desires that in his Church the gates of forgiveness should always be open to anyone who turns away from sin.(Mt 18:21-2)
983 Catechesis strives to awaken and nourish in the faithful faith in the incomparable greatness of the risen Christ’s gift to his Church: the mission and the power to forgive sins through the ministry of the apostles and their successors:
The Lord wills that his disciples possess a tremendous power: that his lowly servants accomplish in his name all that he did when he was on earth.
Priests have received from God a power that he has given neither to angels nor to archangels … God above confirms what priests do here below.
Were there no forgiveness of sins in the Church, there would be no hope of life to come or eternal liberation. Let us thank God who has given his Church such a gift.
984 The Creed links “the forgiveness of sins” with its profession of faith in the Holy Spirit, for the risen Christ entrusted to the apostles the power to forgive sins when he gave them the Holy Spirit.
985 Baptism is the first and chief sacrament of the forgiveness of sins: it unites us to Christ, who died and rose, and gives us the Holy Spirit.
986 By Christ’s will, the Church possesses the power to forgive the sins of the baptized and exercises it through bishops and priests normally in the sacrament of Penance.
987 “In the forgiveness of sins, both priests and sacraments are instruments which our Lord Jesus Christ, the only author and liberal giver of salvation, wills to use in order to efface our sins and give us the grace of justification” (Roman Catechism, I, 11, 6).
M
mormon_fool
Guest
I meant the apostle John that is the John in the group that includes Peter, James, and John.
T
tkdnick
Guest
mormon fool:
Here’s my question…How in the world could some 2,000 yr old man be around somewhere “unbeknownst to us”??? There mere fact of a guy that old would draw HUGE numbers of people and stories. ESPECIALLY if it were someone who was an Apostle of Christ. Also, how could there have been a total apostasy after the death of the Apostles if one of them never died? Wouldn’t he then take “control” of Jesus’ church and lead it until his death?
P.S. - How’s finals going?
As I understand it, Catholic teaching is that John died approximately around 100 and is the only Apostle not to die a martyr’s death.
Here’s my question…How in the world could some 2,000 yr old man be around somewhere “unbeknownst to us”??? There mere fact of a guy that old would draw HUGE numbers of people and stories. ESPECIALLY if it were someone who was an Apostle of Christ. Also, how could there have been a total apostasy after the death of the Apostles if one of them never died? Wouldn’t he then take “control” of Jesus’ church and lead it until his death?
P.S. - How’s finals going?
S
seanie
Guest
.
mormon fool,
seeking “plausibility” is simply another way of stating the fallacy of “argument from ignorance.” You say it’s *plausibe * that Mormonism is true. Anyone else can say it’s *plausible * Mormonism isn’t true. Where does that get you?
Even the argument from ignorance will get you nowhere in this instance, as all it does is ignore the copious evidence that does exist *against * Mormonism,
P
PaulDupre
Guest
We Catholics don’t believe that Cain is still walking around either. Have the Mormons ever conjectured about what would happen if John and Cain ever met?
God bless,
Paul
God bless,
Paul
M
moira
Guest
Great answer! I’ve just started reading the BoM partly because I just can’t see how anyone (no offense to anyone) could believe it and because I have a very dear friend who is Mormon. Already in the 1st book of Nephi after reading 10 chapters, I see a lot of inconsistencies.
Such as 1Nephi 4:26. “…and he, supposing that I spake of the brethren of the church” Did the Jews ever use the word church? I’m sincerely asking.
And in 1Nephi 10;14, he uses the word Gospel which I also don’t recall seeing in the Old Testament. I could be wrong. It’s happened before.
And just an observation, doesn’t he use the phrase ‘And it came to pass’ an awful lot? In the first 5 chapters, 44 verses start with that. It’s also very hard to read and seems to go in circles sometimes.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
You noticed that, too, huh? 
God bless you,
Paul
God bless you,
Paul
M
moira
Guest
Yeah, It’s real hard to get meaning out of it. It’s almost like he added as many words as he could to make it a longer book; like a kid might do to get a better grade?You noticed that, too, huh?
God bless you,
Paul
O
oat_soda
Guest
mormonism, only in america could something like this start. we have the freedom to construct any reality we wish. but i wonder without laws grounded in the 10 commandments and natural law, how can we stop from spiraling into moral chaos? is mormonism a result of a flawed system?
mormonism would have been squashed if it reared its crazy head in 12th century catholic europe. they almost got sent to mexico for practicing polygamy,… poor mexico.
mormonism would have been squashed if it reared its crazy head in 12th century catholic europe. they almost got sent to mexico for practicing polygamy,… poor mexico.
C
Chris-WA
Guest
I saw a videotaped dialogue between Catholic apologist Patrick Madrid and an LDS representative once. That same question was posed to the LDS rep and he said that he supposed that God had some other role in mind for John other than taking over the church. The answer didn’t go any deeper than that.
C
Chris-WA
Guest
mormon fool:
mormon fool:
mormon fool:
I would ask you to reconsider increasing your standards of proof here, if for no other reason than the fact that this is such a critical issue between our two churches. Also there is so much available documentation from the early church period that one cannot reasonably ignore it in deference to any testimony given 1700 years later. As far as the evident vs.plausible thing goes, when you limit yourself to just “plausible,” anything becomes possible. There is too much info out there to take such a low cut at the issue.
mormon fool:
I doubt these Mormon scholars are the experts on patristic theology. There are probably much better treatments by others out there.
mormon fool:
I have another article written by a former Bishop of the Salt Lake Diocese that is more comphrehensive if you’re interested.
M
mormon_fool
Guest
Nevertheless, this is approach I take. I see my participation on this thread as an opportunity to represent mormon viewpoints. Since no informed mormon I know claims that the apostasy can be proved solely and absolutely by historical and biblical evidence, then I would be a fool to assert otherwise.
You are right there is a lot of info out there, and the info is worth discussing for the evidence we can infer out of it.
Well if I can ease your doubts any on mormon scholarship here is what David Waltz, a Catholic, says about Nibley (in this review farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=361):
“Gifted with a brilliant mind, Nibley has mastered Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, German, French, Spanish, Coptic, and Egyptian, giving him tools that very few possess to study patristics. Well before the translation and publication of many of these discoveries into English, Nibley started to write about them.”
But I will grant that there might conceivable be better treatments out there. I forgot about the Waltz review on Bickmore in my earlier post. Waltz concludes his review with:
“Bickmore has certainly demonstrated that many teachings of the LDS Church were present in writings of the early church fathers. Some of the evidence that Bickmore has presented is from confessedly heretical groups, but the majority has been gleaned from what most would call the “orthodox” fathers. Bickmore’s claim that “the Church which Joseph Smith claims to have restored is much closer to the original church of Christ, as revealed in the many documents of the first three centuries after Christ” (p. 354) would be contested by Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant scholars, but the fact remains that Latter-day Saint scholars can appeal to the early church fathers for support on many of their doctrines. Just as Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, and Latter-day Saints disagree over what the Bible teaches, so too, as one should expect, they will disagree over what the church fathers taught. Luther and Calvin felt that the early fathers gave more support to their teachings than to those of the Catholic Church. Now Bickmore and other Latter-day Saint writers believe that the early fathers lend more support to LDS teachings than to any other church’s.”
Maybe later, is it on the net?
S
seanie
Guest
mormon fool,
you mentioned that David Waltz is Catholic.
Where on that FARMS website does it say David Waltz is a Catholic? His profile says only he is “a serious student of the Christian religion.”
you mentioned that David Waltz is Catholic.
Where on that FARMS website does it say David Waltz is a Catholic? His profile says only he is “a serious student of the Christian religion.”
O
oat_soda
Guest
LDSChurch were present in writings of the early church fathers. this is because when he reads the early church fathers he’s assuming that his theology is correct. it is like a scientist who looks at data to fit his theory instead of basing his theory on the observations. to be objective, the scientific sincere approach will be to look at the data or facts and let them speak for themselves.
evangelicals and gnostics (dan brown’s davinci code) do exactly the same thing with sola scriptura. when something doesn’t agree with their interpretation of scriptures, they ignore it. this is why the only way we know divine revelation is because it has been handed down to us. we should be able to demonstrate reasonably that this revelation has been consistently and faithfully handed down by the historical evidence all the way to the apostles. if someone claims that this divine revelation was lost at some point during the great apostasy, they are throwing out any objective means to test weather what they say is true or not, in which case their theology is based on a fantasy.
A
AugustineH354
Guest
Perhaps the most concise (and cogent) treatment on the issue of the “great” apostasy was a recent address by Dr. Noel Reynolds (BYU). An audio version and transcript is available at:
byubroadcasting.org/findatalk/search.asp
Once there, type in Reynolds and hit search–his 6/15/2004 talk “What Went Wrong…” will appear at the top of the list.
Grace and peace,
Aug
byubroadcasting.org/findatalk/search.asp
Once there, type in Reynolds and hit search–his 6/15/2004 talk “What Went Wrong…” will appear at the top of the list.
Grace and peace,
Aug
C
Chris-WA
Guest
mormon fool:
I have read a lot of what the early church fathers have said, and I have a real hard time imagining that anyone could gleam LDS doctrines out of them. These men were thoroughly Catholic, and I question anyone who claims otherwise. The doctrines they taught in unison include:
The authority of the “Catholic” church.
The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
The apostolic succession of the bishops.
The importance of the Mass.
The belief in the Communion of Saints.
and most importantly for this thread:
The Continuity of the Church.
Who is David Waltz? How do you know he is a Catholic? Got any more information on him?
I have read a lot of what the early church fathers have said, and I have a real hard time imagining that anyone could gleam LDS doctrines out of them. These men were thoroughly Catholic, and I question anyone who claims otherwise. The doctrines they taught in unison include:
The authority of the “Catholic” church.
The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
The apostolic succession of the bishops.
The importance of the Mass.
The belief in the Communion of Saints.
and most importantly for this thread:
The Continuity of the Church.
A
AugustineH354
Guest
Chris posted:
The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
The apostolic succession of the bishops.
The importance of the Mass.
The belief in the Communion of Saints.
and most importantly for this thread:
The Continuity of the Church.>>
Me: Bickmore’s book was primarily written for two audiences: Mormons and Protestants; and this for a good reason—almost all anti-Mormon literature is produced by Protestants.
Now, with that said, Mormons and Catholics have more in common than most perceive at a first glance: the need for a central church authority; that there is only one, true visible church; the need for a valid, authoritative, ordained ministry; a rejection of the Protestant doctrine of “faith alone”; a rejection of the Protestant doctrine of “scripture alone”; the belief that the sacraments (ordinances) are efficacious and necessary; deification; and the Monarchia of God the Father, to name but a few.
This is not to say that important, crucial differences to not exist, for they do; but rather, that the overall worldview of Mormonism has more in common with the ECF’s than the Protestant worldview
Grace and peace,
David (aka – Aug)
Me: It is I.
Me: I converted to the RCC April 2002 during Easter Vigil.
Me: What would you like to know?
The authority of the “Catholic” church.
The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
The apostolic succession of the bishops.
The importance of the Mass.
The belief in the Communion of Saints.
and most importantly for this thread:
The Continuity of the Church.>>
Me: Bickmore’s book was primarily written for two audiences: Mormons and Protestants; and this for a good reason—almost all anti-Mormon literature is produced by Protestants.
Now, with that said, Mormons and Catholics have more in common than most perceive at a first glance: the need for a central church authority; that there is only one, true visible church; the need for a valid, authoritative, ordained ministry; a rejection of the Protestant doctrine of “faith alone”; a rejection of the Protestant doctrine of “scripture alone”; the belief that the sacraments (ordinances) are efficacious and necessary; deification; and the Monarchia of God the Father, to name but a few.
This is not to say that important, crucial differences to not exist, for they do; but rather, that the overall worldview of Mormonism has more in common with the ECF’s than the Protestant worldview
Grace and peace,
David (aka – Aug)
M
mormon_fool
Guest
Waltz is a staunch Catholic who has studied mormonism since 1987 and dialogued with mormon apologists and scholars at least since 2000. He frequently posts on some mormon apologetic sites.
Edit: I see the man himself has shown up.
- Status