Mormon Religion

[ParkerD]

I don’t think that you have read properly/understood my comments. (Obviously I do not accept Smith’s book as scripture nor his rants about Catholicism as coming from Jesus). If you are saying that it is OK for the LDS to attack me as a heretic but that I am not allowed to return the ‘compliment’ then thank you, this appears to be summarise the LDS on Christianity very neatly.

StevieD,
I hope you have understood that you have not been attacked, particularly in the way you describe here. Christ taught admonishing those who were the teachers and leaders, not the followers who were merely following where their shepherds led them. Christ’s words to Joseph Smith (from the Bible as I already noted) did what He had done before. Those words did not include you at all, nor was the word “heretic” ever used.

Peace to you and all.

 

[scottj]

Re: Mormon Religion

---

Is this getting anywhere? The cult is of no importance!

Doesn’t Jesus want us to love one another?
As I said, we (Catholics) don’t have to like anything about the Mormon religion, but we should love our brothers and sisters and speak to them with kindness. After all, I know I do not like it when another denomination tells me I am observing the “wrong” religion, even though I know for myself (as one can ONLY speak for oneself) that Catholicism is the perfect fit for my soul. Only with kindness and patient speaking can one ever expect to “convert” someone to the church.

 

[Answersplease]

Answersplease,
It is a far different thing to feel “brainwashed” with fear placed in one’s heart because of how they are taught and how traditions are used to make them feel “forced”, than to feel conviction in one’s heart because what they have been taught as a child continues to ring true to their soul and makes an indelible impression that they choose to live by. A youth in their teenage years often rebels against the former, but if they have had a truthful “in word and deed” example from their parents then although they will pull away from their parents by nature, their heart will tell them certain things they had been taught are true and the Holy Spirit will confirm those impressions to their soul and strengthen them to live by those impressions.

But I give up on whether one such as yourself will ever understand the difference. Oh, well–that’s life.

I was told that my testimony for the whole thing (the BoM and JS) would come along. The more I would bear it, the more it would be there is what I was told. Now, years later, it almost sounds like brainwashing. But there were so many good things that I saw in the people that I figured there had to be truth in it. I think many converts get caught up in that trap.

(color added)

mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

Mormon Molly Bennion writes:

"Many have argued, often under the guise of ‘milk before meat,’ that we must not disillusion the new or weak with all-too-human history or the questioning of the Lord’s anointed

–questioning being by definition under this theory, criticism, even heresy. Better the lie."[9]

“How do I know the church is true? Because I know the church is true.”

…M. Russell Ballard said [in a talk to the missionaries]…
He told a story of a missionary who came to him and said ‘I can’t say that I know the church is true because I don’t really know it and I feel guilty when I say it.’

Ballard (who was a mission president at the time) responded: ‘The way you gain a testimony is in the bearing of it.’ In other words he told this missionary and essentially all of us in the conference, if you don’t know the church is true just keep lying to all of your investigators and tell them you do know, until you have said it enough times that you brainwash yourself into believing it is true." [13]

…practice of psychological conditioning, Mormons repeat to each other over and over again in church life, almost word for word, “I know the Church is true. I know the Book of Mormon is true. I know that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God.” Mormons are taught, “Bear your testimony often”

[15].

One Mormon writes:

"Quite simply, you can’t have a testimony until you bear it to someone.

At the moment that you tell someone that you know X is true - even if you don’t know it yet - the Spirit will testify to you that it is indeed true. It may sound a little iffy, but I can tell you that it’s true.
…

If you want to know for sure that the Church is true, tell someone else." [16]

mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

(color added)

Cicero, Academica, i. 45.

“Nothing is more shameful than to affirm before knowing.”

mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

 

[Answersplease]

Answersplease,
It is a far different thing to feel “brainwashed” with fear placed in one’s heart because of how they are taught and how traditions are used to make them feel “forced”, than to feel conviction in one’s heart because what they have been taught as a child continues to ring true to their soul and makes an indelible impression that they choose to live by. A youth in their teenage years often rebels against the former, but if they have had a truthful “in word and deed” example from their parents then although they will pull away from their parents by nature, their heart will tell them certain things they had been taught are true and the Holy Spirit will confirm those impressions to their soul and strengthen them to live by those impressions.

But I give up on whether one such as yourself will ever understand the difference. Oh, well–that’s life.

I was told that my testimony for the whole thing (the BoM and JS) would come along. The more I would bear it, the more it would be there is what I was told. Now, years later, it almost sounds like brainwashing. But there were so many good things that I saw in the people that I figured there had to be truth in it. I think many converts get caught up in that trap.

(colors added)

mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

Mormon Molly Bennion writes:

"Many have argued, often under the guise of ‘milk before meat,’ that we must not disillusion the new or weak with all-too-human history or the questioning of the Lord’s anointed

–questioning being by definition under this theory, criticism, even heresy. Better the lie."[9]

“How do I know the church is true? Because I know the church is true.”

…M. Russell Ballard said [in a talk to the missionaries]…
He told a story of a missionary who came to him and said ‘I can’t say that I know the church is true because I don’t really know it and I feel guilty when I say it.’

Ballard (who was a mission president at the time) responded: ‘The way you gain a testimony is in the bearing of it.’ In other words he told this missionary and essentially all of us in the conference, if you don’t know the church is true just keep lying to all of your investigators and tell them you do know, until you have said it enough times that you brainwash yourself into believing it is true." [13]

…practice of psychological conditioning, Mormons repeat to each other over and over again in church life, almost word for word, “I know the Church is true. I know the Book of Mormon is true. I know that Joseph Smith is a prophet of God.” Mormons are taught, “Bear your testimony often”

[15].

One Mormon writes:

"Quite simply, you can’t have a testimony until you bear it to someone.

At the moment that you tell someone that you know X is true - even if you don’t know it yet - the Spirit will testify to you that it is indeed true. It may sound a little iffy, but I can tell you that it’s true.
…

If you want to know for sure that the Church is true, tell someone else." [16]

mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

(color added)

Cicero, Academica, i. 45.

“Nothing is more shameful than to affirm before knowing.”

mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord

 

[Bill_Pick]

Hi,

I love the show Big Love … and I know it is a TV show but I’m at the end of the third season and I have some questions.

Firstly in the show a bishop or priest vists one of the characters to see why she is not going to chuch etc. They also know they have not being paying tithes and once they find out she is in a plural marriage kick her out (though I’m in the middle of the episode so am just guessing this happens).

Are people in the Mormon Church allowed to visit your house and accuse you of things like that?

Also are you not allowed to attened church unless you pay tithes? What happens if you are poor?

Also is it true there are strange rituals in the temple? I’ve had a friend in the past who was Mormon who said only some people could visit this area … why is that?

What about Mormon having baptism for dead people, that is very strange

 

[dianaiad]

Sometimes at the request of the person…which is suicide, with another’s assistance.

And maybe if you can produce something that shows this is something Catholics are doing by the millions…probably not. Right.

Can you answer why?

“Why” doesn’t matter. I’m quite certain the church had a good reason why. Who cares? The point is, they were dead, and the church excommunicated/ anathematised them. (shrug) To go from ‘The church doesn’t excommunicate dead people’ to 'well, maybe they did but they deserved it…" is actually not a winning argument, Rebecca.

As to euthanasia…since when do numbers count with you? You need to make up your mind here. When the numbers are weighted AGAINST you, as they are with the relative abortion statistics between Mormons and Catholics, you give me the ‘it’s the principle’ of the thing…mere numbers don’t count. Given that, why should the relative rarity of euthanasia compared to abortion matter, if the situation for BOTH things is that they are culturally and legally permissible? The argument you used for putting abortion on the latae sententiae list is that it IS culturally and legally permissible, and it is that which makes it more a rebellion against the church than other mortal sins…since most other mortal sins happen also to be illegal.

So…euthanasia also qualifies on this point, does it not?

lol. So we’ll stick with your definition of Catholic practice. got ya.

No, the person is still Catholic, even though a dead one. When are you going to stop with this kicking to the curb thing?

You are the one, aren’t you, that told me that ‘kicking to the curb’ was literally being thrown out like garbage. It occurred to me that being dug up from your grave and having your body thrown into a midden, or torn apart and thrown in the nearest river is a pretty literal example of that. (shrug)

As to whether the person remains Catholic…well, I do think we’ve covered that one pretty well. Any person who was baptised Catholic remains a Catholic no matter what: personal inclination, excommunication, resignation, exhumation and tossing away…gotcha.

…and you guys have the NERVE to cavil at LDS proxy baptism. Sheesh.

It’s only mormons who believe you can change a person’s religion after they are dead.

And you have the chutspa to yell at me for misrepresnting YOUR beliefs? Rebecca, WE cannot change a person’s religion at ANY time. The choice remains with the person involved. Always. We can offer a choice, but the only person who can change his religion is…that person. At least we believe a person DOES have that choice.

You, however, seem to believe that once a Catholic is baptised, nothing in the universe can change that, even though most Catholics had NO choice in whether they were baptised or not; it was something done to them, not BY them.

Again, you should answer why this is done.

irrelevant, Rebecca. Your claim wasn’t that they didn’t deserve it, but rather that it simply was not done at all. I frankly don’t care whether they deserved it or not.

You should notice we’re back to reasons for excommunication and how it seems you can’t grasp it is for rebellion.

So abortion is rebellion for the reasons you claim…but you don’t seem to grasp that THOSE SAME EXACT REASONS APPLY to euthanasia. Precisely. Since euthanasia is not on the list, then there is something else going on, either ‘instead of’ the reasons you state, or 'in addition to." I would simply like to know what those reasons are.

It’s called the Sacrament of Reconciliation. If a person does not believe the teachings of the Church, why would they seek Reconciliation from her? It would be like you going to confession. Sure, a priest might hear your confession, but he would not offer absolution.

That’s quite a non-sequitur, Rebecca. I’m quite certain you are correct about this, but it has nothing to do with the point, does it?

 

[jake23]

Calling the LDS Church a cult serves no purpose but to turn Mormons away from Catholicism. The LDS Church may be wrong but it is no more a cult than the Catholic Church.

Calling the catholic church is proclaiming a lack of self knowledge on the matter. Yes one can argue any faith organized group is an occult by the fact somthing cannot scientificly be proven, however by christian difinition it is an occult for several reasons and has no similarities, especialy since one beleive in the existance of only one God and the other believes there are multiple Gods existing. Viewing all the threads in reference to to Mormanism has shown that no one has gone anywhere on finding a common ground nore has anyone converted the other. There are different opinions and then there are those who offend Christs honor. Proclaiming the truth is charity even if it does hurt and offend some!

 

[dianaiad]

Yes, you always go back to that subject of how the Catholic Church doesn’t excommunicate murderers and rapists and etc.

YOU WERE TOLD MANY TIMES BY ME THAT THERE IS NO CONFUSION ABOUT THOSE SINS (the people who commit them know they are wrong but they do them anyway), therefore there is no need to formally pronounce an excommunication, the informal excommunication IS ENOUGH, and those sins are ENOUGH to send them to hell if God judges that they deserve it.

Are you honestly telling me that any Catholic who has been a Catholic for more than five minutes is NOT aware of the Catholic position on abortion being a mortal sin? In fact, is it possible to JOIN the Catholic church without being made very aware of this fact? Are you HONESTLY telling me that there is any confusion about the Catholic position on abortion?

Not to mention, of course, that there is no involuntary excommunication for those sins, either. Answersplease, if a Catholic commits a mortal sin for which a latae sententiae excommunication is the result, going to confession and getting absolution is sufficient, yes? However, for abortion that is NOT enough. That excommunication has to be officially LIFTED. In many cases that can be done at the same time, and by the same priest, as the confession—but in many cases it can’t. Either way, they are two separate things. These other sins, as horrendous as they are and as much as they SHOULD keep the sinner from taking communion until they have gone to confession, do NOT incur latae sententiae excommunication–and thus the added step of getting it lifted is not required.

Tell me honestly…I’m looking at a bright blue sky…where am I wrong here?

THERE IS A LOT OF CONFUSION ABOUT ABORTION (millions of Catholics think it is not so bad), therefore the Catholic Church must clear up that confusion by FORMALLY PRONOUNCING an EXCOMMUNICATION.

answersplease…there must be more than one of you posting under this screen-name… as often as I have been yelled at about this–and by YOU…you know better. The church doesn’t NEED to formally pronounce a latae sententiae excommunication. It is automatic at the instant the sin is commited; self imposed by the sinner, more or less. In fact, I’ll bet most of the time it is only formally recognized long enough to lift it.

You just like to keep bringing it up again just so you can make it seem like that the Catholic Church condones that kind of behaviour and to BASH THE CATHOLIC CHURCH with it.

I am quite aware that you believe that murderes, rapists and child molesters probably to to hell. I doubt that anybody could consider that an accusation that you condone such behavior. It is obvious that the church considers them, though mortal sins, not worthy of excommunication. I think it would be a good idea for you to stop defending against attacks I’m not making. However, given that this entire thing began by Catholics getting snooty and disapproving because of the way the CoJCoLDS handles excommunications, especially regarding which sinners are excommunicated and which are not, you are simply going to have to suck up any responses that point out double standards.

ALL THOSE HORRIBLE SINS IMPOSE INFORMAL EXCOMMUNICATION AND MAKES PEOPLE UNWORTHY TO RECEIVE THE EUCHARIST.

False, Answersplease. NONE of those sins do that. There is a specific list of sins that result in latae sententiae excommunication, and none of those sins are on it. Sorry.

You have been told this time after time and you just ignore it just so you can keep using your current favorite bashing tactic of mentioning that the Catholic Church doesn’t excommunicate people for horrible crimes.

You may indeed do so. I don’t know WHAT sins might result in formal excommunication proceedings. That isn’t latae sententiae excommunication, though…and…who ARE you? Frankly, you aren’t making any sense.

You can’t defend your position so you just ignore certain points, do you honestly think observers can’t see that?

Anyone, from any religion, can read this thread almost from the beginning and see how you ignore points that nnullify your bashing, but you just ignore those points so you can continue bashing.

 

[dianaiad]

Murder and rape are illegal, these things are acknowledged by civil laws as wrong, abortion on the other hand has no penalties, nothing to say that it is wrong. All around the world more and more laws allow for abortion, somewhere there must be a voice that says this is wrong. The Catholic church is that voice and it says it by excommunication.

As an aside I find it very ironic that an LDS would think that high standards (against abortion) are the cause of dismal abortion statistics, in every aspect of poor behavior (out of wedlock birth, drinking, importance of families and so on) the high standards of the LDS are touted as the reason for their success.

Where did I say that ‘high standards (against abortion)’ are the cause of dismal abortion statistics?" Pointing out that Catholics world wide have an abysmal record in that area isn’t mentioning that ‘high standards against abortion’ is the CAUSE. Pointing out that the LDS record on abortion is far better, and that perhaps the difference between the way the two belief systems approach it might have something to do with it isn’t saying that ‘high standards’ is the problem.

After all, we have rather high standards against abortion, too…and we have a lot fewer of them.

 

[dianaiad]

A lot of what you say here is true. But the big difference between the two excommunications here is that a Catholic excommunication is based on one action, and the Mormon excommunication is based upon any number of personal things, having to do with the person’s personal history and collections of actions. In other words, it’s a personal judgement upon that person. A Catholic excommunication is only a judgement on that person in that it states that, yes, they did do this one, specific thing, and knew very well what the Church says about it and what it would incur before they did it. There is no interview, no examination of previous sins, no judgement based upon personal history, etc. In other words, it is a statement about the action that can be universally applied to any person committing this one, specific act in full knowledge of the consequences. The consequences that had already been set forth, in no personal connection to themselves in any way, and stated previously to the act committed. Can you really say that about a Mormon excommunication?

You are talking about the difference between LDS excommunication and the concept of Catholic latae sententiae excommunication…and when you compare those two, you are correct. We have no concept of latae sententiae excommunication. However, Catholics ALSO have the formal court imposed excommunications–and the process is rather like the LDS version of the same, including courts and official judgments. You need to compare apples to apples, here…and when you do, you will find that Catholics do it very much the way you are criticizing Mormons for doing things.

 

[sablouwho]

After all, we have rather high standards against abortion, too…and we have a lot fewer of them.

Hi Diana,

I haven’t followed the entire thread so I apologize in advance if I am asking a redundant question.

I am wondering how the rate of abortion among LDS women is known and/or estimated? It doesn’t seem like something that someone would want to keep private. (For that matter, I admit I am not sure how the rate of Catholic abortions is estimated, either.)

thanks!

 

[dianaiad]

Calling the catholic church is proclaiming a lack of self knowledge on the matter. Yes one can argue any faith organized group is an occult by the fact somthing cannot scientificly be proven, however by christian difinition it is an occult for several reasons and has no similarities, especialy since one beleive in the existance of only one God and the other believes there are multiple Gods existing. Viewing all the threads in reference to to Mormanism has shown that no one has gone anywhere on finding a common ground nore has anyone converted the other. There are different opinions and then there are those who offend Christs honor. Proclaiming the truth is charity even if it does hurt and offend some!

Jake, the word “cult” does NOT come from the word “occult.” Both words come from the same root, but that’s not at all the same thing. “Cult” simply means 'belief system." That’s it. Any other definition attached to the word “cult” is ALWAYS subjective and generally perjorative…it’s an insult, pure and simple. It means only 'I don’t like you and I think your beliefs are weird."

No matter who uses it.

 

[dianaiad]

Are you honestly telling me that any Catholic who has been a Catholic for more than five minutes is NOT aware of the Catholic position on abortion being a mortal sin? In fact, is it possible to JOIN the Catholic church without being made very aware of this fact? Are you HONESTLY telling me that there is any confusion about the Catholic position on abortion?

Not to mention, of course, that there is no involuntary excommunication for those sins, either. Answersplease, if a Catholic commits a mortal sin for which a latae sententiae excommunication is

(addendum…for the picky, the word “NOT” should be here!)

the result, going to confession and getting absolution is sufficient, yes? However, for abortion that is NOT enough. That excommunication has to be officially LIFTED. In many cases that can be done at the same time, and by the same priest, as the confession—but in many cases it can’t. Either way, they are two separate things. These other sins, as horrendous as they are and as much as they SHOULD keep the sinner from taking communion until they have gone to confession, do NOT incur latae sententiae excommunication–and thus the added step of getting it lifted is not required.

 

[dianaiad]

Hi Diana,

I haven’t followed the entire thread so I apologize in advance if I am asking a redundant question.

I am wondering how the rate of abortion among LDS women is known and/or estimated? It doesn’t seem like something that someone would want to keep private. (For that matter, I admit I am not sure how the rate of Catholic abortions is estimated, either.)

thanks!

Yep.

Actually, I did a rather extensive examination about this, comparing both religions and such. It turns out that the rate of abortion for LDS women is about 4 to 5%. Utah’s rate is a little over 6.5% according to this, among other studies.

Catholic abortion rates world wide hover around 27%. I did a comparison study between to geographical areas that have good abortion statistics, and have similar population and religious affiliation; an area in Utah and Rhode Island. Rhode Island is 63 % Catholic, and Utah County is about 70% LDS. Rhode Island has a 29% abortion rate. Utah County has
something like a 10% rate.

That’s a little fuzzy, but not too much so. The rate may vary from area to area by 5 percentage points.

 

[sablouwho]

Actually, I did a rather extensive examination about this, comparing both religions and such. It turns out that the rate of abortion for LDS women is about 4 to 5%. Utah’s rate is a little over 6.5% according to this, among other studies.

Catholic abortion rates world wide hover around 27%. I did a comparison study between to geographical areas that have good abortion statistics, and have similar population and religious affiliation; an area in Utah and Rhode Island. Rhode Island is 63 % Catholic, and Utah County is about 70% LDS. Rhode Island has a 29% abortion rate. Utah County has
something like a 10% rate.

Thanks for this.

Just thinking out loud here–I wonder if these stats make a distinction between women who aborted who were actually practicing their religion actively and ones who are “adherents” in name only, and those who were somewhere in between?

I think it would be important to know that in order to be able to draw conclusions from the data.

 

[aspirant]

I am wondering how the rate of abortion among LDS women is known and/or estimated? It doesn’t seem like something that someone would want to keep private. (For that matter, I admit I am not sure how the rate of Catholic abortions is estimated, either.)

Some abortion providers survey clients regarding non-identifying information like marital status, race, age, highest level of education attained, whether using contraceptives at the time of conception, reasons for seeking abortion, etc. The largest collector of this kind of information is the Guttmacher Institute, former research arm of Planned Parenthood, which creates periodic reports on the data. The most recent is July 2008. Because abortion providers are not required to survey and report in this manner, but only some do it voluntarily, it has limitations. But it’s the best information of this kind available, as far as I know.

In the July 2008 report, 27% of women obtaining abortions in the United States “identify themselves as as Catholic.” As far as I can tell, it is only a question of religious self-identification, and does not make any attempt to discern whether a person is practicing or nominal.

 

[sablouwho]

Some abortion providers survey clients regarding non-identifying information like marital status, race, age, highest level of education attained, whether using contraceptives at the time of conception, reasons for seeking abortion, etc. The largest collector of this kind of information is the Guttmacher Institute, former research arm of Planned Parenthood, which creates periodic reports on the data. The most recent is July 2008. Because abortion providers are not required to survey and report in this manner, but only some do it voluntarily, it has limitations. But it’s the best information of this kind available, as far as I know.

In the July 2008 report, 27% of women obtaining abortions “identify themselves as as Catholic.” As far as I can tell, it is only a question of religious self-identification, and does not make any attempt to discern whether a person is practicing or nominal.

I think that this last bit is really rather important. Without knowing this, it would be rather hard to come to meaningful conclusions.

I am guessing that someone who is nominally Catholic (or nominally LDS) would probably be more likely to abort than an active adherent of either faith.

 

[aspirant]

I am guessing that someone who is nominally Catholic (or nominally LDS) would probably be more likely to abort than an active adherent of either faith.

This seems more likely to me (in both religious communities).

I know that nominal and non-practicing Catholics are very likely to continue self-identifying as Catholics.

Is the same true among the LDS? I would guess that the same is true for cradle-LDS folk, that they continue to self-identify as Mormon/LDS, but I don’t know about converts who don’t remain committed.

 

[ParkerD]

Answersplease:
Hi, Answersplease,
Sometimes it’s quite funny to think of how you approach your challenge of posting what is on your mind. It brings to my mind the scene in the movie with Danny Kaye, “The Court Jester”, where he pretends that the woman in the wagon is mute and she gives him an answer to pass along to those who are asking questions about the wagon. It’s a funny, funny scene–what a laugh!

So if I am to assume you would like an answer, then the answer is that the Holy Spirit will guide someone who is testifying of truth, and sometimes the person doing the teaching will have a very strong impression at the very moment they are teaching, which will let them know (if they have been paying attention) that they have just learned something “new”–something greater than the knowledge they had before. It is a case of being taught by a heavenly source, and acknowledging that and being sensitive to it.

But that kind of inspiration is not an automatic, as shown by those who have brought out websites where they essentially self-justify why they left the LDS church, and trot out all their reasons. It’s no big deal to me. It is a natural expectation that people will do exactly that.

Self-justification has been around forever on this earth–truly, since the very beginning after the fall of Eve and Adam. It is nothing new. One can see it for what it is, or not–choose as you wish.

 

[bookgirl32]

You are talking about the difference between LDS excommunication and the concept of Catholic latae sententiae excommunication…and when you compare those two, you are correct. We have no concept of latae sententiae excommunication. However, Catholics ALSO have the formal court imposed excommunications–and the process is rather like the LDS version of the same, including courts and official judgments. You need to compare apples to apples, here…and when you do, you will find that Catholics do it very much the way you are criticizing Mormons for doing things.

ANY Catholic excommunication is a “formal” excommunication. It is an authoritative statement by the Church as to the status of “communion” that individual holds with the Church. An “informal” excomm. would simply be mortal sin. Anyone who commits a mortal sin excommunicates themselves automatically.

And no, a “formal” excomm. as you put it by the Church still only has to do with specific action, not on any history of the sinner. And not based on anything outside od the excommunicable offense. The “courts” you speak of would be deciding if that offense indeed was excommunicable and if the person had sufficient knowledge of the gravity prior to the action. Again, excomm. is used to make a wide ranging and public stAtement on specific actions. The personal consequence of mortal sin is sufficient for the indi idual person morally. Again the judgement made by the Church is on the action and whether or not the person committed the action, not the person themselves. The judgement made by God is on the person. The Church is not authorized nor is it capable of doing so.