LDS Women's Conference - Eve's transgression: courageous and wise?

[RebeccaJ]

Do you have a way of explaining this in greater depth? Not necessarily how you might have interpreted it, but how the Mormons would have explained it to you?

Mormonism is a patriarchal system. The male leaders recognize that abuse of this “power” is probable, and so teach that men should not have “unrighteousness dominion”. Which of course, implies there is “righteous dominion”. It has the result that LDS men believe, about themselves, that the Holy Ghost guides them in ways that others will never know. Women, children, non-LDS…all lacking in the stronger spiritual direction given to male Mormons. (Keep that in mind when having discussions with male Mormons here on this forum.)

Platitudes, like the book given to me, or this statement in their conference, are meant to show that God does use women for his purposes outside of the patriarchal chain. It is of course, a very, very rare occurrence for God. Happens every day and every moment for male Mormons.

But what it is, is in the story of Eve they have to explain how it is that Eve acted outside the direction of her husband. Women are never, ever, counseled to do this in Mormonism.

From a Mormon POV they believe they are living the patriarchal system of the Old Testament (restored). From my POV, they are try to imitate a culture, which isn’t required by God. Mormons don’t have a concept of “God meets us where we are.” They think cultural examples in the Old Testament need to be imitated in order for God to work. Of course this is not uniform, they pick and choose what needs to be “restored” and what can be done without.

What justification or evidence do they use to support this idea (that Adam & Eve were unable to have children)? I’m unaware of Catholic teaching/opinion regarding this, so the concept is new to me.

God blessed Adam and Eve, saying be fruitful and multiply, before the fall. Catholic understanding is this blessing was immediate. Mormons believe because Adam and Eve didn’t recognize their own nakedness, that they would have been like children without sexual desire or capability, until this recognition came about. (Lust had to enter the world.)Which didn’t happen until after the fall. Therefore, they see the fall as necessary to having children.

 

[lerapt78]

Mormonism is a patriarchal system. The male leaders recognize that abuse of this “power” is probable, and so teach that men should not have “unrighteousness dominion”. Which of course, implies there is “righteous dominion”. It has the result that LDS men believe, about themselves, that the Holy Ghost guides them in ways that others will never know. Women, children, non-LDS…all lacking in the stronger spiritual direction given to male Mormons. (Keep that in mind when having discussions with male Mormons here on this forum.)

Platitudes, like the book given to me, or this statement in their conference, are meant to show that God does use women for his purposes outside of the patriarchal chain. It is of course, a very, very rare occurrence for God. Happens every day and every moment for male Mormons.

But what it is, is in the story of Eve they have to explain how it is that Eve acted outside the direction of her husband. Women are never, ever, counseled to do this in Mormonism.

From a Mormon POV they believe they are living the patriarchal system of the Old Testament (restored). From my POV, they are try to imitate a culture, which isn’t required by God. Mormons don’t have a concept of “God meets us where we are.” They think cultural examples in the Old Testament need to be imitated in order for God to work. Of course this is not uniform, they pick and choose what needs to be “restored” and what can be done without. .

Thank you for the information you provided. But I’m still trying to understand your previous statement:

“The argument being made is that the power of women is found in obedience to a hierarchy of men, even when that obedience seems counter intuitive and cries out to your soul to RUN.”

in how it relates to women having any sort of power. From what you just said above, it seems as though they believe God has to *remove *women from under the patriarchy in order for them to serve a good purpose. So how can they be powerful *within *the role of obedient servant to the male hierarchy? Are you referring to God Himself as part of that hierarchy - that they are powerful only when they are obedient to Him? Or is it to suggest that women are powerful precisely *because *they obey the male church members - that obedient submission is a form of power on its own?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Thank you for the information you provided. But I’m still trying to understand your previous statement:

“The argument being made is that the power of women is found in obedience to a hierarchy of men, even when that obedience seems counter intuitive and cries out to your soul to RUN.”

in how it relates to women having any sort of power. From what you just said above, it seems as though they believe God has to *remove *women from under the patriarchy in order for them to serve a good purpose. So how can they be powerful *within *the role of obedient servant to the male hierarchy? Are you referring to God Himself as part of that hierarchy - that they are powerful only when they are obedient to Him? Or is it to suggest that women are powerful precisely *because *they obey the male church members - that obedient submission is a form of power on its own?

“May we not conclude that obedience, in and of itself, is a source of power" James E. Talmage (Mormon apostles)

 

[Janderich]

As LDS we believe that the fall was a step down but a step forward and that through the atonement we will be lifted up above the state we would have found ourselves if Adam and Even had not fallen. C. S. Lewis once put it this way, “God is not merely mending, not simply restoring a status quo. Redeemed humanity is to be something more glorious than unfallen humanity would have been,…”

So my question is, do Catholic’s believe that personal righteousness, grace, and the atonement simply restore us to the state we found ourselves in before the fall?

 

[Boulder257]

This is a ridiculous and odd statement/doctrine. It’s good to disobey God? SMH Just one more reason to run…fast!

 

[Janderich]

As LDS we believe that the fall was a step down but a step forward and that through the atonement we will be lifted up above the state we would have found ourselves if Adam and Even had not fallen. C. S. Lewis once put it this way, “God is not merely mending, not simply restoring a status quo. Redeemed humanity is to be something more glorious than unfallen humanity would have been,…”

So my question is, do Catholic’s believe that personal righteousness, grace, and the atonement simply restore us to the state we found ourselves in before the fall?

Anyone?

 

[Tarquin]

As LDS we believe that the fall was a step down but a step forward and that through the atonement we will be lifted up above the state we would have found ourselves if Adam and Even had not fallen. C. S. Lewis once put it this way, “God is not merely mending, not simply restoring a status quo. Redeemed humanity is to be something more glorious than unfallen humanity would have been,…”

So my question is, do Catholic’s believe that personal righteousness, grace, and the atonement simply restore us to the state we found ourselves in before the fall?

Articles of Faith #2 “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.”

According to Mormon soteriology, we do not need to be “restored” to the state that humans were in before the fall, because we have all, already, been born in that state. We are not partakers of Adam’s sin, therefore we are not in a state like his after the fall; we are in a state like his before the fall.

There is something unreasonable about that. For if Adam sinned, then he could not have taught and raised his children as he would have done, had he not sinned. Therefore, if in no other way, we would have partaken of his sin, and suffered indirect punishment for his sin, by virtue of having been raised and educated by a sin-filled, Satan-believing parent rather than a pure, undefiled, true-to-God, Holy Parent.

 

[KathleenGee]

There is a devotion right now that is still not public in the Church, that is coming out of a region of Italy.

It regards living the perfect Will of God, this work giving our will to the Lord every day and in all things that He lives within us…through the intercession of Mary. But there is trouble with translations and in the USA, there have been problems if so called mystics attaching their ideas with this devotion, or volumes going out without proper translation Hence, it is not to be practiced yet in the Church.

But it does talk about returning to the original state of Adam and Eve through the Will of God within us. We will have a new heaven and a new earth with our Lord’s glorious coming…but likewise, heaven is a state of being around us right now…and the Kingdom of Christ is among us…(not within, which is heresy and makes us fall into quietism). So that is all I can add for now.

The difference is we believe in dying to self to allow the Man God to live within us, to make us more genuine and real. How I understand Mormonism it is about progression of self.

Mormons completely by pass the Virgin Mary as the New Eve.

 

[RebeccaJ]

As LDS we believe that the fall was a step down but a step forward and that through the atonement we will be lifted up above the state we would have found ourselves if Adam and Even had not fallen. C. S. Lewis once put it this way, “God is not merely mending, not simply restoring a status quo. Redeemed humanity is to be something more glorious than unfallen humanity would have been,…”

So my question is, do Catholic’s believe that personal righteousness, grace, and the atonement simply restore us to the state we found ourselves in before the fall?

Well, you’re trying to mold C. S. Lewis into the Mormon idea of “eternal progression”, which is using Lewis in a way he never meant or believed.

God does not desire that we have the “courage” to sin in order to progress in wisdom (or anything else). Teaching such an idea is teaching a lie, straight from the father of lies. There isn’t a Christian on the planet who ever believed such a thing, including C.S. Lewis.

 

[Janderich]

So, I have not received a clear answer to my question as to weather Catholics believe the atonement restored us to the same state we found ourselves in before the fall. From the CCC 420 I get this, “The victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us: “where sin increased, grace abounded all the more” (Rom 5:20).” This appears to be saying that yes, thanks to the fall and the atonement we have received greater blessings then those which sin took from us. If I am wrong please correct me, I do not mean to misrepresent this statement. However, if this is true, then how else can we understand the ultimate effects of the fall except as an opportunity to improve our condition? Because of the fall Christ came into the world. Because of Christ men are lifted up to a higher state.

“For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor 15:21-22).

 

[KathleenGee]

Irregardless, it is our lower nature that still leads us to sin. We still have effects of Original Sin, and it is why Christ in the Gospel of Luke told us to do penance for the remission of our sins lest we likewise perish.

We will never become gods.

And Christ said we are to carry our cross and follow Him every day, for just one day has enough of its own problems. How I understand Mormonism is that it opposes the image of the Cross in its beliefs and practices.

Our baptism makes us sons and daughters of the Lord. We must die to ourselves, not exalt ourselves.

Our first vocation as Catholics is to enter into the life of the Holy Trinity, to enter into communion with the Holy Trinity through the Word and Sacraments, and to die to self daily, and allow the Lord’s life and grace to enter into us and lead us. This is most difficult.

Christ’s mercy far outweighs all the sins committed then now and tomorrow. But if we do not accept redemptive suffering, that is the tool to allow Christ to continue to work through us and extend His presence into the world through us and the gifts He has given us, we are lukewarm.

Christ spits out the lukewarm. And Catholics who do not endure in charity will not be saved and suffer more than any other Christian in the next life.

Grace is the help and means that brings Christ into our souls. Grace brings us faith to believe in Him. But grace is not the end in itself.

Those who endure to the end will be saved. We must live the Cross daily.

Last night I was listening to the Papal homilist, an Italian Capuchin at St. Peter’s. The talk was on Judas Iscariot. Judas betrayed Christ over money.

Money is the great idol. Judas was concerned about money being used to pay for oil and other things that could have been used for the poor. Don’t we see that the spector of money is used to deny Christ’s adornment of His dwelling place?

Christ loved poverty. He spoke of the dependence of God we see in the lilies of the field, the sparrows, how the Lord cares for every single hair on our heads. People find self esteem in their money, in their possessions, and they never have enough.

Isaiah says yesterday at Good Friday that the Man of Sorrows was someone looked upon someone wretched, not standing out in a crowd.

Can we now transfer this unseemly Man God into those around us who are unattractive and troublesome…those in our families and those in our daily life? Can we serve Him in difficult people who hurt us? Can we separate our self esteem from the good image of the world, of being with those who have it all, who are successful in getting things and holding important positions?

Mother Mary embraced poverty like her son. She did not seek anything but to do the Lord’s will.

I think we should focus on living in the Lord and His grace. Those who were companions and disciples of Jesus for 3.5 years did not recognize Him on Resurrection Sunday.

Likewise, for us to be authentic, with Mary’s help, we need to endure in the Cross, irregardless what will become of us outwardly for living it. We must look on the Cross and hope for full communion with the Lord, and that will come at the Last Judgment.

Who we are today, how we look, who we associate with won’t matter any more. We and this world will be the new creation with the Lord, the new heaven and new earth in the New Jerusalem.

The New Jerusalem will be the fulfillment of all grace.

 

[LivingWaters7]

So, I have not received a clear answer to my question as to weather Catholics believe the atonement restored us to the same state we found ourselves in before the fall. From the CCC 420 I get this, “The victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us: “where sin increased, grace abounded all the more” (Rom 5:20).” This appears to be saying that yes, thanks to the fall and the atonement we have received greater blessings then those which sin took from us. If I am wrong please correct me, I do not mean to misrepresent this statement. However, if this is true, then how else can we understand the ultimate effects of the fall except as an opportunity to improve our condition? Because of the fall Christ came into the world. Because of Christ men are lifted up to a higher state.

“For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor 15:21-22).

Yes, Catholic teaching is that despite the Fall, Christ’s death and resurrection provides us with greater blessings than what we would have had if we were all in the Garden.

I believe someone else already mentioned that God can make good things, even better things, come from bad situations. The issue I see, and which I have never really understood, is the LDS belief that God gave two contradictory commandments: be fruitful and multiply, and do not eat the “forbidden fruit”. This is a catch-22. From the LDS perspective, Adam and Eve could not have been fruitful and multiplied prior to the Fall. Therefore, the Fall was necessary for that to occur. This view is not held in Catholicism, and I think is the main issue with how LDS view the Fall. Why would God give two contradicting commandments? Why would He create a situation where one would have to sin (or transgress), disobeying one commandment, in order to fulfill another?

So yes, Catholic theology certainly embraces what C.S. Lewis taught on the matter (Lewis came from an orthodox Christian point of view, specifically Anglican, IIRC). You will find various quotes on that matter within the Catholic context. The problem arises in the LDS view of God essentially setting up Adam and Eve, and I simply don’t see how it makes sense that God would put them in the situation where they had to disobey one of His commandments to obey another (i.e. God giving contradicting commandments).

 

[KathleenGee]

Good points, LivingWaters.

To live in grace is to live in the Cross, and this is the point of transformation of Christ’s grace at working coming through us to reach that which is evil or broken in the world around us.

Grace is calling us to serve, to transform, and with Christ, we work with Him to bring about His effects and salvation, all through Mary.

It is Mary who is called full of grace and the New Eve.

 

[Janderich]

Yes, Catholic teaching is that despite the Fall, Christ’s death and resurrection provides us with greater blessings than what we would have had if we were all in the Garden.

I believe someone else already mentioned that God can make good things, even better things, come from bad situations. The issue I see, and which I have never really understood, is the LDS belief that God gave two contradictory commandments: be fruitful and multiply, and do not eat the “forbidden fruit”. This is a catch-22. From the LDS perspective, Adam and Eve could not have been fruitful and multiplied prior to the Fall. Therefore, the Fall was necessary for that to occur. This view is not held in Catholicism, and I think is the main issue with how LDS view the Fall. Why would God give two contradicting commandments? Why would He create a situation where one would have to sin (or transgress), disobeying one commandment, in order to fulfill another?

So yes, Catholic theology certainly embraces what C.S. Lewis taught on the matter (Lewis came from an orthodox Christian point of view, specifically Anglican, IIRC). You will find various quotes on that matter within the Catholic context. The problem arises in the LDS view of God essentially setting up Adam and Eve, and I simply don’t see how it makes sense that God would put them in the situation where they had to disobey one of His commandments to obey another (i.e. God giving contradicting commandments).

Hi LW, This statement, “Yes, Catholic teaching is that despite the Fall, Christ’s death and resurrection provides us with greater blessings than what we would have had if we were all in the Garden” is very significant don’t you think? If the fall provides the faithful greater blessings, then it was good thing it happened, is it not? Perhaps Adam and Eve should not be vilified?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Hi LW, This statement, “Yes, Catholic teaching is that despite the Fall, Christ’s death and resurrection provides us with greater blessings than what we would have had if we were all in the Garden” is very significant don’t you think? If the fall provides the faithful greater blessings, then it was good thing it happened, is it not? Perhaps Adam and Eve should not be vilified?

Who is vilifying Adam and Eve? Certainly not Catholics. The Catholic Church holds December 24th, in addition to being Christmas Eve, as the Feast Day of Adam and Eve. Odd, if we were vilifying them. Perhaps you should demonstrate the vilification of Adam and Eve.

Catholics do not look at the Fall as a “good thing” per se It is never “good” to disobey God. It is never “good” to go against a commandment of God. However, we recognize that God, in His mercy and love, brought something good out of something bad.

As an aside, Catholics view Jesus Christ as the “New Adam”, and Mary as the “New Eve”.

Again, I think the main problem with the LDS view on the Fall, from the Catholic view, is that it has God setting up a no-win situation, where He gave two commandments, yet Adam and Eve couldn’t follow one without breaking the other. It was like a trick.

 

[iepuras]

Hi LW, This statement, “Yes, Catholic teaching is that despite the Fall, Christ’s death and resurrection provides us with greater blessings than what we would have had if we were all in the Garden” is very significant don’t you think? If the fall provides the faithful greater blessings, then it was good thing it happened, is it not? Perhaps Adam and Eve should not be vilified?

Can you please provide evidence that Adam and Eve are ‘vilified’ by Christians? When I was LDS, I certainly thought Christians vilified Adam and Eve, but not once have I actually heard any vilification from a Christian. Not even in my RCIA class when we discussed the Fall and Original Sin.

 

[TexanKnight]

Hi LW, This statement, “Yes, Catholic teaching is that despite the Fall, Christ’s death and resurrection provides us with greater blessings than what we would have had if we were all in the Garden” is very significant don’t you think? If the fall provides the faithful greater blessings, then it was good thing it happened, is it not? Perhaps Adam and Eve should not be vilified?

That is an odd thing to say. First, you need to be specific about who Adam is. According to BY, Adam is our God…is that who you mean?

According to the temple ceremony pre-1990, Michael the Archangel is Adam and, along with Jesus, he created the earth.

As to vilifying, we do not vilify Adam and Eve, but we DO recognize they sinned.

 

[Janderich]

Can you please provide evidence that Adam and Eve are ‘vilified’ by Christians? When I was LDS, I certainly thought Christians vilified Adam and Eve, but not once have I actually heard any vilification from a Christian. Not even in my RCIA class when we discussed the Fall and Original Sin.

Perhaps “vilified” is too strong a word. But you would call her a sinner would you not? And that through her, original sin came into the world. Certainly Catholics do not believe she is an example for women to follow or there would be no need for this thread.

 

[Janderich]

Who is vilifying Adam and Eve? Certainly not Catholics. The Catholic Church holds December 24th, in addition to being Christmas Eve, as the Feast Day of Adam and Eve. Odd, if we were vilifying them. Perhaps you should demonstrate the vilification of Adam and Eve.

Catholics do not look at the Fall as a “good thing” per se It is never “good” to disobey God. It is never “good” to go against a commandment of God. However, we recognize that God, in His mercy and love, brought something good out of something bad.

As an aside, Catholics view Jesus Christ as the “New Adam”, and Mary as the “New Eve”.

Again, I think the main problem with the LDS view on the Fall, from the Catholic view, is that it has God setting up a no-win situation, where He gave two commandments, yet Adam and Eve couldn’t follow one without breaking the other. It was like a trick.

So the fall ended up being a good thing and not only good but something better then we would have had without the fall. By disobeying God Christ was sent into the world and through him we are lifted above our pre-fallen state. Do you see the contradiction you have created?

 

[TexanKnight]

So the fall ended up being a good thing and not only good but something better then we would have had without the fall. By disobeying God Christ was sent into the world and through him we are lifted above our pre-fallen state. Do you see the contradiction you have created?

A good thing? Pain and suffering were brought into a perfect world. The Suffering and death of Christ was needed to atone.

Yeah…great thing.

Geez