T
twopekinguys
Guest
They do research that site, as well as others, and then ask why they weren’t taught about it.
Missionaries sure as heck don’t teach it.
That is why people feel they have been lied to.
Get it now?
- Status
Missionaries sure as heck don’t teach it.
That is why people feel they have been lied to.
Get it now?
T
truthsilence
Guest
Even when I asked my “Mormon bishop” to clear up some confusion I had about lessons being taught in “Gospel Doctrine” class (scare quotes intentional), I couldn’t get a straight answer. Talk about being caught up in a tangled web of deceit. You can’t see it when you’re stuck right in the middle of it. It takes a lot to break free.
But all who truly seek, find. That’s a Promise.
How refreshing it is to finally get real answers to real questions, no matter how unflattering they might be, or whether or not the person you ask thinks you’re able to handle the truth.
But all who truly seek, find. That’s a Promise.
How refreshing it is to finally get real answers to real questions, no matter how unflattering they might be, or whether or not the person you ask thinks you’re able to handle the truth.
I
invisible_man
Guest
I am a little confused about your post. If you were taught something in the Gospel Doctrine class and you were confused, why not ask the teacher? I am sure that the teacher could have helped. Maybe the Bishop did not want to step on the teacher’s shoes. What deceit could there be if you were taught something? It was out in the open with nothing hidden.
I
invisible_man
Guest
What do Catholics learn in Catechism? I am sure that there is much not taught there also. I don’t think that most Catholics know their church’s history. I could be wrong but I just don’t see people being that up on history in general.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
We learn about Church teachings AND about History. But again, the difference is NOT who teaches or does not teach. The difference is, the Catholic Church does not teach a dishonest past. The lds “church” does.
P
Porknpie
Guest
Invisible,
Please give me your response to post 250…copied below. Curious I am to your thoughts here on how God would lead a prophet to do the exact opposite of what is taught in the bible.
Do you believe that one should honor and respect those that break the 10 Commandments, in this case adultery?
Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had over 80 wives between them. Is this what Prophet Hinckley means by polygamy being carefully controlled and safeguarded? Are they due honor and respect for breaking the law and the Ten Commandments?
Do you agree with your church on this?
Please give me your response to post 250…copied below. Curious I am to your thoughts here on how God would lead a prophet to do the exact opposite of what is taught in the bible.
Do you believe that one should honor and respect those who break the law?
Do you believe that one should honor and respect those that break the 10 Commandments, in this case adultery?
Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had over 80 wives between them. Is this what Prophet Hinckley means by polygamy being carefully controlled and safeguarded? Are they due honor and respect for breaking the law and the Ten Commandments?
Do you agree with your church on this?
T
twopekinguys
Guest
I am so glad you asked. I happen to be the RCIA Director for our parish.
We cover absolutely as much as possible, including at least 2 full sessions on Church history. Remember of course, we have 2000 years of history compared to 200 for mormons.
During the sessions on history (or any other session), nothing, and I mean nothing is off the table. Mormons on the other had, aren’t so forthcoming.
In addition, several resources are provided at each class so participants can do more research on their own.
I was talking to mormon missionaries online not so very long ago, and as soon as I asked a simple question about the journal of discourses, BANG, something came up, and they had to go. I tried it more than once, and each time, the same response. Coincidence? I don’t think so.
So, unfortunately, I don’t think your premise works at all. Good try though.
T
truthsilence
Guest
What makes you think I didn’t? I absolutely did! Not only did I ask the “teacher”, I asked another member of the bishopric who was in attendance as well. Their answers were completely vague and certainly unhelpful. So I went to the bishop.
I have no idea what this bishop wanted, or didn’t want, to do. I would hope he would want “teacher’s” teaching correct doctrines of the church.
All ANY of these men could tell me about what we were taught that day was, “You won’t find it in the scriptures”, and, “It isn’t “officially” doctrine”. At the time I thought that was creepy, and only added to my confusion. Now I see it as deceitful. And creepy. Perhaps the bishop was confused?, no, I don’t think so. I think he knew they were teaching doctrines that most people would reject, so he simply called it “unofficial”.
By the way, what was being taught was complete blasphemy. And I thank God for knowing my heart, and leading me out of there.
T
truthsilence
Guest
Thank you for your witness, and your service to the church.
Our RCIA classes were handled the same way.
L
LivingWaters7
Guest
How do you know? Have you been Catholic? Have you been LDS? You have yet to answer. How are you “sure”? Instead it’s more speculation (“I don’t think”, “I could be wrong”).
L
LivingWaters7
Guest
You are going on your own experience with lds.org, already aware of certain “issues”, and searching for them. That is not what we’re talking about, nor is it relevant to the average LDS experience. Further, why do you think it isn’t taught in the classes, meaning, it isn’t taught in the manuals we taught from?
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Right back at ya!!
T
TheIrishman
Guest
Umm as current member of the LDS church and I attend a church University, I can honestly say with a straight face that members, especially younger ones, are slowly denying prophets of old. Polygamy is viewed as this great big shame of the church along with the racism. No one likes the doctrine and no one wants to believe it ever happened. Thats typical mormon theology. If you don’t like something, pretend it never happened. Before you speak on behalf of a church, at least be affiliated with them.
B
Brandon_Cal
Guest
I can’t believe Catholic and LDS catechesis is actually being compared. I’m a practicing, howbeit unbelieving, LDS who is on his God-only-knows-what-trip through RCIA. I know first hand the differences between the two. Granted, there may be some regional and cultural differences so I cannot say definitively that all LDS experiences mirror my own, neither can I say that all RCIAs throughout the US are similar to the one I attend. Nevertheless, apples to apples (LDS Gospel Doctrine classes here in Southern California, and Catholic RCIA also here in Southern California), I’ve noticed a great difference in the latitude of what a person is even allowed to ask, let alone seriously question.
I remember when I brought up a number of questions concerning certain papal encyclicals written between the mid-to-late 19th century about human origins (with respect to possible conflicts with the “modern” Catholic Church’s allowance for its faithful to accept the theory of evolution). The RCIA director very politely said that my question is incredibly complex and that he couldn’t possibly do it justice in a mere matter of minutes, but that I’m doing a good job in thinking how Papal Infallibility may or may not work on paper. He then started a sort of “addendum” course for the RCIA class right after our normal meeting hour for all of us who wanted to delve really, really, really deep into Catholic theology. The very first class we spent an hour learning about every single type of papal document there is (apostolic letter, vs. apostolic constitution, vs. motu proprio, vs. papal encyclical, etc.) and the relative amount of infallibility each carried. This class was incredibly thorough, and I eventually got my very scholarly, very nuanced answer about a week later.
Contrast this with what I’ve actually witnessed among the Mormons. I’ve had a Bishop tell me (as a youth) that my questioning is evidence of some grave sin that’s causing me to lose my testimony, I’ve seen my own EQP chastise another Elder for “opening up old wounds that should just be left alone” (the questions were in regards to Mountain Meadows… Compare that to RCIA where I’ve heard questions about the Inquisitions and the Crusades answered forthwith and with sympathy).
Maybe it hasn’t always been this way; we do hear lots of stories about those vicious nuns in Catholic school in the 50s, but the Catholic Church seems to trust its members with information far more than the LDS Church does its own. I’m sure if the LDS Church could get away with it they’d make having an Internet censor on all practicing LDS’ computers as a requirement to being temple worthy. After all, I remember very vividly my first experiences as a home teacher when I was a Deacon a very long time ago. At that time we were instructed to inform the Bishop of any family that owned a copy of No Man Knows My History, by the late Fawn Brodie. Never mind that a very devout LDS person might own a copy in order to better equip themselves for apologetic work, simply owning that book would be cause for the Bishop to more heavily scrutinize your activities, and this would most certainly result in a more lackluster calling.
I’ve never once been told in RCIA that we shouldn’t read “anti-Catholic material” (read: anything written by a non-Catholic), I’ve never heard anyone during Mass or during a social event state a downright lie about Catholic church history… Heck! I’ve even witnessed a number of times priests use the blemishes in church history during their homilies! I’ve never seen a piece of Catholic art that dramatically alters the stated history of the faith. I’ve never seen Catholic scholars of Catholic universities excommunicated and fired for espousing borderline-heterodox views.
In my experience, there simply is no comparing the two churches and their behavior with history and doctrine. While the Catholic church at times may be reticent, the LDS Church is downright duplicitous.
I remember when I brought up a number of questions concerning certain papal encyclicals written between the mid-to-late 19th century about human origins (with respect to possible conflicts with the “modern” Catholic Church’s allowance for its faithful to accept the theory of evolution). The RCIA director very politely said that my question is incredibly complex and that he couldn’t possibly do it justice in a mere matter of minutes, but that I’m doing a good job in thinking how Papal Infallibility may or may not work on paper. He then started a sort of “addendum” course for the RCIA class right after our normal meeting hour for all of us who wanted to delve really, really, really deep into Catholic theology. The very first class we spent an hour learning about every single type of papal document there is (apostolic letter, vs. apostolic constitution, vs. motu proprio, vs. papal encyclical, etc.) and the relative amount of infallibility each carried. This class was incredibly thorough, and I eventually got my very scholarly, very nuanced answer about a week later.
Contrast this with what I’ve actually witnessed among the Mormons. I’ve had a Bishop tell me (as a youth) that my questioning is evidence of some grave sin that’s causing me to lose my testimony, I’ve seen my own EQP chastise another Elder for “opening up old wounds that should just be left alone” (the questions were in regards to Mountain Meadows… Compare that to RCIA where I’ve heard questions about the Inquisitions and the Crusades answered forthwith and with sympathy).
Maybe it hasn’t always been this way; we do hear lots of stories about those vicious nuns in Catholic school in the 50s, but the Catholic Church seems to trust its members with information far more than the LDS Church does its own. I’m sure if the LDS Church could get away with it they’d make having an Internet censor on all practicing LDS’ computers as a requirement to being temple worthy. After all, I remember very vividly my first experiences as a home teacher when I was a Deacon a very long time ago. At that time we were instructed to inform the Bishop of any family that owned a copy of No Man Knows My History, by the late Fawn Brodie. Never mind that a very devout LDS person might own a copy in order to better equip themselves for apologetic work, simply owning that book would be cause for the Bishop to more heavily scrutinize your activities, and this would most certainly result in a more lackluster calling.
I’ve never once been told in RCIA that we shouldn’t read “anti-Catholic material” (read: anything written by a non-Catholic), I’ve never heard anyone during Mass or during a social event state a downright lie about Catholic church history… Heck! I’ve even witnessed a number of times priests use the blemishes in church history during their homilies! I’ve never seen a piece of Catholic art that dramatically alters the stated history of the faith. I’ve never seen Catholic scholars of Catholic universities excommunicated and fired for espousing borderline-heterodox views.
In my experience, there simply is no comparing the two churches and their behavior with history and doctrine. While the Catholic church at times may be reticent, the LDS Church is downright duplicitous.
D
Darryl_B
Guest
Invisible Man statistically has a 95% probability of being Mormon or LDS. However he talks from a disassociative position, which is interestingly a common thing to do in some minor religions, and I have seen it often enough. Taking a third-party impartial defendant role rather than first-party role is far easier when one is not so confident in that role.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
P
Porknpie
Guest
Brandon -
God bless on your RCIA journey. I would add this…
Reading anti-Catholic material is a very good thing for a Catholic to do. The questions asked and the comments made drive a Catholic to search for the Catholic response. Much of this can easily be seen on CAF. This results in greater faith as the answers lead to a greater understanding of the Catholic faith…in truth as Christ taught his apostles and as the apostles taught their descendants, as reflected in the Written Word of God and Sacred Tradition. The Catholic answers to anti-Catholic comments always are built on faith but are seen through reason and there is consistency. What is different with the LDS faith as you are observing and as other ex-LDS have testified, is that one is criticized for asking questions and LDS apologetics can not answer many questions using any manner of reason.
Starting with : there never was a apostasy in the early Church. Quite the opposite, Christ said he would guide his Church to all Truth until the end time…and scripture says the Church grew greatly, guided by the Holy Spirit…and no matter where the apostles went in the early Church, they taught the seven sacraments, including the Eucharist. Why? Because that is what Christ himself taught them. Completely consistent with the Catholic Church teachings…and completely contradictory of the grape juice drink and bread by the LDS Church.
M
Miriam1947
Guest
I believe it is bread and water these days.
P
Porknpie
Guest
Thanks for the correction…pulled the attached from WIKI for the sake of speed. Interesting how again, Jesus command in the Written Word (Bible) contradicts LDS teaching, revealing a contradictory God in LDS theology. A theology that once practiced the use of wine in the Lord’s Supper…a Church that once owned wineries…a God that changes his mind and contradicts himself.
The use of wine as a symbol of the blood of Christ
As originally practiced by the Latter Day Saint prophet Joseph Smith, Jr. and other early Latter Day Saints, the sacrament included the use of fermented wine, though the Church now uses water in each congregation’s weekly sacrament meeting.
Commanded in an 1830 revelation (LDS D&C 27:2-4) not to purchase alcohol from enemies, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints focused on producing its own wine, eventually owning and operating vineyards and wineries in Utah and California (including Napa Valley) during the 19th century.
In 1833 Joseph Smith received the revelation known as the Word of Wisdom, part of which states that alcohol consumption is harmful to a person’s health and well-being. Initially the Word of Wisdom was treated simply as counsel, and the early saints would still drink alcohol on occasion. During the late 19th century, church leaders slowly started to take the Word of Wisdom as a commandment. This increased respect for the Word of Wisdom, combined with the scripture in Doctrine and Covenants 27: “**t mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the Sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory,” led congregations to begin substituting water for the Sacramental wine. (Water has also been used as a symbol of Christ and his mission at various times, including Jesus’s ‘living water’ sermon.) The practice was officially adopted church-wide in 1912.[citation needed]
Occasionally circumstances permit various other food substitutes as well. Crackers and tortillas are sometimes used in outdoor, rugged settings, such as church sponsored Boy Scout camping trips.[citation needed] The Church’s official policy, however, is that Boy Scout troops not camp or hike on Sundays. Stories abound of WWII impoverished European congregations using potato slices.[citation needed] In the above situations, however, the word “bread” (in English) is typically used in the prayers.**
T
truthsilence
Guest
“unbelieving, LDS who is on his God-only-knows-what-trip through RCIA” I had to highlight this part especially. Wow, I remember that feeling so well!
Thinking about what you wrote here. All of it (except being a deacon and a home teacher, as I am a girl
) is so true, and, mirrors my own experience very well. I believe the reason this happens, the dodging of questions, denying past doctrine’s, worrying over losing testimonies and what one might discover in a book or on the internet is this: Truth stands on its own. Whoever seeks, finds. When Truth is found, the rest of what we learn doesn’t impact that. I’ve been upset as hell over abuses in the Church, I mean really really pissed off. But when it comes to Truth, I already know what that is, so there’s no threat from what people do or have done in the past. The Truth remains and that’s what I was looking for in the first place.So, in contrast to that, Truth with a capital T is completely convoluted in the LDS church. There’s plenty to worry about if you’re wanting to live in the Truth and remain a Mormon. It’s impossible, and deep down a lot of them know it. I pray for them. It’s an incredibly hard place to be.
God bless your journey, Brandon Cal.
- Status