Mormons to build temple in Rome

[zerinus]

Maybe if you listened to Elder Holland’s Canference talk instead of just reading it, you could express your opinion of it more clearly so I can understand. You can listen to it with Windows Media Player here, or with Apple Quicktime here. It might be easier to download the file to your computer and then listen to it, as the bandwidth of the Church’s website is not always sufficient to listen to it directly online.

 

[Jerusha]

Yeah, “no thank you” is a good response. My home computer crashed last month very soon after I sat on an LDS website for research purposes.

 

[zerinus]

You sound very insecure. Amazing!

 

[AdvanceAlways]

Although I am disappointed that the LDS is building a temple in Rome, we as Catholics do not have much to worry about. The LDS does not proselytize at their Temples, seeing as they are for members only. The Temple exists to serve the local LDS population. If they built a BYU-Rome, I would be worried but this is not the case.

 

[valient_Lucy]

Although I am disappointed that the LDS is building a temple in Rome, we as Catholics do not have much to worry about. The LDS does not proselytize at their Temples, seeing as they are for members only. The Temple exists to serve the local LDS population. If they built a BYU-Rome, I would be worried but this is not the case.

I doubt that Louis XIV would have felt threatened if he saw a child building a sandcastle next to Versailles.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Maybe if you listened to Elder Holland’s Canference talk instead of just reading it, you could express your opinion of it more clearly so I can understand. You can listen to it with Windows Media Player here, or with Apple Quicktime here. It might be easier to download the file to your computer and then listen to it, as the bandwidth of the Church’s website is not always sufficient to listen to it directly online.

I have listened to it and he does, misrepresent, mock and accuse us of dismissing Christ.

And since my original response was to BacalzoLDS and his complaint about being called a false religion by posters here I think that the disrespectful talks given by LDS apostles fit right in or “make sense” especially since I have never heard a Catholic priest, or read anything from a Catholic Bishop tear down the LDS in the same way Holland did, or like Bruce R. Mcconkie

 

[zerinus]

I have listened to it and he does, misrepresent, mock and accuse us of dismissing Christ.

Well, unless somebody is willing to explain it, none of your posts make sense to me, I assure you.

 

[majick275]

Well, unless somebody is willing to explain it, none of your posts make sense to me, I assure you.

but the word does not revolve around you and his posts make sense to the rest of us. we are secure in the true faith while you are a but a wannabe cyber missionary for a dwindling cult.
JS was little different than jim jones or david koresh. those who follow his ramblings do so at great peril to their soul

 

[dianaiad]

Well I don’t really care much for having my creeds called an abomination or being called an atheist. And while you all continue to make excuses for BRM I don’t know of an equal authority in the Catholic church who made the same sort of ugly remarks against the LDS that Bruce R. McConkie did toward the Catholic church.

and Mormons have called Catholics “atheist” where, precisely? …It is true that we called the creeds an abomination early on. A little harsh, perhaps…but they ARE apostate, we believe, as in ‘wrong…" (at least in part) so perhaps when someone is all wound up and pulpit pounding, "abomination’ may have seemed an appropriate word, especially when the claim is that GOD said that “their creeds are an abomination in my sight.”

Of course, even if you don’t believe that God said any such thing, don’t you think that 190 years is a long time to hold a grudge, considering all the nasty stuff Catholics have said about Mormons over the years? I mean, really; if we stack insults up against each other, it would be rather embarrassing…but not to the Mormons.

You could start with MAD, while Dianiad and Whyme insist they are nice I could name quite a few posters over there who have nothing nice and lots nasty to say about the Catholic Church. Are you new to being a cyber missionary?

I claim that they are nice? I wouldn’t know, sir, since I don’t actually, y’know, POST over there. Or read it. But hey, I’ll tell you what–you go over there and find every anti-Catholic post written over on MAD (isn’t that MADB?) by a MORMON (not by an ex-Mormon or a non-Mormon) for a specific period of time. You pick when and for how long. For every single one you give me, I will give you four, or five, or even ten nasty insults about Mormons and/or Mormonism posted right here in non-Catholic religions.

I’m so confident about what you will (or rather, will NOT) find that I haven’t even gone to look to see if I might be making a fool of myself.

 

[dianaiad]

And you should know I worked in the publishing business for many years. Bookcraft, while not owned by the LDS Church, was owned and ran by prominent LDS business people. There were more than a few apostle’s sons working there at the time Deseret Book purchased them.

Oh goodness gracious me; you get a publishing company in a town that is over 50% LDS and you actually have LDS folks working there. How…awful.

At any rate, I can assure you Parker, that if your church leaders did not want a book published by either one of these businesses, it wouldn’t. Why do you think the two publishers combined in the first place? I can tell you for a fact that it is what your church leaders wanted and directed.

Then you are quite aware that Bro. McConkie was told, at the time he was called to be an apostle, that he had to rewrite and correct some of the things that he had written.

Of course, you CAN go ahead and claim that “Mormon Doctrine” was NOT changed from the first edition to the last, but since the changes in the book are considered ammunition for the anti’s, I think that would be a road you don’t want to go down.

As well, Rebecca, your reasoning is intensely circular: you claim that the Church would not allow “Mormon Doctrine” to be published by Bookcraft or Deseret Book if it weren’t officially sanctioned…why? The thing is, they DID allow it to be published, and they were NOT completely happy with the first edition. We know this because they required changes.

So you are in an untenable position here; you can’t argue that they would not allow unsanctioned stuff to be published, because, well, they did.

I don’t really care Parker that your church is building a temple in Rome. It changes nothing of the Truth of the Catholic Church. Targeting Catholics, in order to lead them away from Truth, is not a benign practice. To pretend that your temple is not included in proselyting practices is not honest.

Why then, building a cathedral in Salt Lake City would be considered a “not benign” practice either, for the same reasons. Yet the Mormons not only did not object, they helped…and still do. For instance, were you aware that the Mormon Tabernacle Choir OPENED the centenial Madeleine Festival (the centenial festival of the building of that particular cathedral) by concerts held in Temple Square honoring it, and that the LDS church and the Catholic church worked VERY closely together to make that festival a memorable one?

So…has it ever occurred to you that your attitude regarding this issue is a little one sided?

I mean…it’s OK with you for Catholics to build in “Mormon” territory (SLC) and for Catholics and Mormons to work together there, but we must not sully Rome?

That’s quite a double standard there, Rebecca.

 

[dianaiad]

Yeah, “no thank you” is a good response. My home computer crashed last month very soon after I sat on an LDS website for research purposes.

And of course it’s the fault of the Mormons, right, Jerusha?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Oh goodness gracious me; you get a publishing company in a town that is over 50% LDS and you actually have LDS folks working there. How…awful.

99% LDS folks working there. Your point?

Then you are quite aware that Bro. McConkie was told, at the time he was called to be an apostle, that he had to rewrite and correct some of the things that he had written.

Yes Diana, he only wrote what your church taught from JS to the time of McConkie. But, your church’s teaching had become offensive to American culture, so your church has backed off on them. You should note you have NEVER been taught they are wrong.

Of course, you CAN go ahead and claim that “Mormon Doctrine” was NOT changed from the first edition to the last, but since the changes in the book are considered ammunition for the anti’s, I think that would be a road you don’t want to go down.

Why would I claim this? Are you having a daydream? I have had both copies in front me (original edition and one from the 90’s) and made the comparison myself.

As well, Rebecca, your reasoning is intensely circular: you claim that the Church would not allow “Mormon Doctrine” to be published by Bookcraft or Deseret Book if it weren’t officially sanctioned…why? The thing is, they DID allow it to be published, and they were NOT completely happy with the first edition. We know this because they required changes.

Yes, they did allow it. And it is still published. And it still contains teachings that people object to. Only the more culturally offensive material was removed. Have you ever heard the sort of semi-joke: in the LDS Church, there is an 11th commandment. “Thou shalt not commit publicity.”

So you are in an untenable position here; you can’t argue that they would not allow unsanctioned stuff to be published, because, well, they did.

No I am not Diana. I know their policies, which include, any doctrinal book that is published is approved by a committee, which committee, includes a member of your twelve. You can write or call their publishing department and ask them if you wish. Very nice people who work there, I am sure they would be happy to answer this question. I also know that the members of your twelve have directed that there should always be certain books on the shelves of Deseret Book, and Mormon Doctrine is one of those books. If your Church did not approve of this book, that describes your doctrine, they wouldn’t publish it.

Why then, building a cathedral in Salt Lake City would be considered a “not benign” practice either, for the same reasons. Yet the Mormons not only did not object, they helped…and still do. For instance, were you aware that the Mormon Tabernacle Choir OPENED the centenial Madeleine Festival (the centenial festival of the building of that particular cathedral) by concerts held in Temple Square honoring it, and that the LDS church and the Catholic church worked VERY closely together to make that festival a memorable one?

Which has to do with what? The Cathedral hosts many non-Catholic musical performances. These performances are not part of Mass. There are also many non-Catholic performances in the great Cathedrals of the US. The National Cathedral in DC is one that comes to mind.

Also Diana, I am a parishioner of the Cathedral. I go to Mass there. It is where I went to RCIA and where I was baptized, by Bishop Wester. You most likely heard about this concert when I posted about it, here, on this forum. I did not go to this concert, but I heard that it went well. The one performance by your choir is not the festival. They opened the musical celebration, which is still going on. The year of celebrating our centennial actually began earlier (months ago), when Bishop Wester opened a time capsule that had been placed in a corner stone. We are celebrating all year, but the big celebration, where we are celebrating for a week straight, is this coming August.

So…has it ever occurred to you that your attitude regarding this issue is a little one sided?

Has it ever occurred to you that LDS are rather two-sided? Your choir perorms in the Cathedral, yet, every person in the choir is a missionary. Set apart as, not just “every member a missionary”. So while you may be all kind, hi we’re performing in your Cathedral, you are at the same time hoping to pull people away from the Catholic Church. Would it shock you to know I am against this?

I mean…it’s OK with you for Catholics to build in “Mormon” territory (SLC) and for Catholics and Mormons to work together there, but we must not sully Rome?

That’s quite a double standard there, Rebecca.

Diana, perhaps you didn’t notice that I said, already, that I could care less that you build a temple in Rome. Was this whole rant based on the idea that you think I do?

 

[mjf001]

99% LDS folks working there. Your point?

Which has to do with what? The Cathedral hosts many non-Catholic musical performances. These performances are not part of Mass. There are also many non-Catholic performances in the great Cathedrals of the US. The National Cathedral in DC is one that comes to mind.

Also Diana, I am a parishioner of the Cathedral. I go to Mass there. It is where I went to RCIA and where I was baptized, by Bishop Wester. You most likely heard about this concert when I posted about it, here, on this forum. I did not go to this concert, but I heard that it went well. The one performance by your choir is not the festival. They opened the musical celebration, which is still going on. The year of celebrating our centennial actually began earlier (months ago), when Bishop Wester opened a time capsule that had been placed in a corner stone. We are celebrating all year, but the big celebration, where we are celebrating for a week straight, is this coming August.

The first time I went to the Cathedral was during Lent the year I was in RCIA. I was there for the Rite of Election, I’ve been able to attend four or five times since then. There was music each time. All I can say, that building has some of the best acoustics I’ve ever heard. It must be wonderful to hear one of those performances.

Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread. As a music lover, I had to comment when I read this.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[RebeccaJ]

The first time I went to the Cathedral was during Lent the year I was in RCIA. I was there for the Rite of Election, I’ve been able to attend four or five times since then. There was music each time. All I can say, that building has some of the best acoustics I’ve ever heard. It must be wonderful to hear one of those performances.

Sorry, didn’t mean to derail the thread. As a music lover, I had to comment when I read this.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[zaffiroborant]

and Mormons have called Catholics “atheist” where, precisely? …It is true that we called the creeds an abomination early on. A little harsh, perhaps…but they ARE apostate, we believe, as in ‘wrong…" (at least in part) so perhaps when someone is all wound up and pulpit pounding, "abomination’ may have seemed an appropriate word, especially when the claim is that GOD said that “their creeds are an abomination in my sight.”

Of course, even if you don’t believe that God said any such thing, don’t you think that 190 years is a long time to hold a grudge, considering all the nasty stuff Catholics have said about Mormons over the years? I mean, really; if we stack insults up against each other, it would be rather embarrassing…but not to the Mormons.

Pratt and Talmage for the atheists remarks. I thought it was you who commented that Talmage was quoting someone else when I mentioned it before.

190 years? The missionaries teach are teaching it right now all over the world it’s in the Preach My Gospel manual. It is also in the Gospel Principles Manual so you are teaching it every time that chapter comes up. It’s part of your correlated curriculum used for all investigators and new members.

 

[dianaiad]

99% LDS folks working there. Your point?

Your proof that 99% of the employees at Bookcraft were LDS is…???

Yes Diana, he only wrote what your church taught from JS to the time of McConkie. But, your church’s teaching had become offensive to American culture, so your church has backed off on them. You should note you have NEVER been taught they are wrong.

Boy, you are making some very broad accusations, assumptions and opinions stated as fact there.

1. That he was accurate about 'what the church taught" (that is, official doctrine, not opinions).
2. That it was only because the teachings ‘had become offensive to American culture’ that 'the church backed off on them."
3. That we have never been taught that they were wrong.

That is some VERY sweeping question begging, Rebecca.

Why would I claim this? Are you having a daydream? I have had both copies in front me (original edition and one from the 90’s) and made the comparison myself.

I wrote that you could claim this, not that you would, or should; it was a hypothetical situation with the consequences attached. You know, like saying “you CAN say that sugar cures diabetes, but since medical science has shown that it does no such thing, that’s a road you might not want to go down.”

Yes, they did allow it. And it is still published. And it still contains teachings that people object to. Only the more culturally offensive material was removed. Have you ever heard the sort of semi-joke: in the LDS Church, there is an 11th commandment. “Thou shalt not commit publicity.”

Then you need to decide what position you are going to take here, Rebecca. Either the church would NOT allow material that differs from official doctrine to be published (which is the position you took earlier) or it DOES (which is what you just stated).

The insulting opinions with which you accompany that admission doesn’t change it any.

No I am not Diana. I know their policies, which include, any doctrinal book that is published is approved by a committee, which committee, includes a member of your twelve. You can write or call their publishing department and ask them if you wish. Very nice people who work there, I am sure they would be happy to answer this question. I also know that the members of your twelve have directed that there should always be certain books on the shelves of Deseret Book, and Mormon Doctrine is one of those books. If your Church did not approve of this book, that describes your doctrine, they wouldn’t publish it.

The point, Rebecca, is that they allowed its publication way back when they were NOT all that happy with what was in it. Your claim was that “Mormon Doctrine” is the official church catechism, of sorts. It’s not. It does not reach that level.

Which has to do with what? The Cathedral hosts many non-Catholic musical performances. These performances are not part of Mass. There are also many non-Catholic performances in the great Cathedrals of the US. The National Cathedral in DC is one that comes to mind.

Then what’s your problem with a Temple in Rome?

Also Diana, I am a parishioner of the Cathedral. I go to Mass there. It is where I went to RCIA and where I was baptized, by Bishop Wester. You most likely heard about this concert when I posted about it, here, on this forum. I did not go to this concert, but I heard that it went well. The one performance by your choir is not the festival. They opened the musical celebration, which is still going on. The year of celebrating our centennial actually began earlier (months ago), when Bishop Wester opened a time capsule that had been placed in a corner stone. We are celebrating all year, but the big celebration, where we are celebrating for a week straight, is this coming August.

Actually, I ‘heard’ about it when I was in Temple Square at the Family History Library the day before yesterday. I then went to the Salt Lake Times, and looked it up, where the article specifically mentioned that the choir OPENED the music festival. (shrug) hey, I only know what’s in the newspapers.

Has it ever occurred to you that LDS are rather two-sided? Your choir perorms in the Cathedral, yet, every person in the choir is a missionary. Set apart as, not just “every member a missionary”. So while you may be all kind, hi we’re performing in your Cathedral, you are at the same time hoping to pull people away from the Catholic Church. Would it shock you to know I am against this?

Diana, perhaps you didn’t notice that I said, already, that I could care less that you build a temple in Rome. Was this whole rant based on the idea that you think I do?

 

[jake23]

LOL! Fellow christians you are wasting your time talking to a member of the Mormon church! It is a house of deciet ran by deciet and no truth will come out of its mouth. The blind choose to stay blind so let them be! As far as building a lds temple in Rome will only allow gods Catholic church to shine more in his light of truth! How can you know good without evil?

 

[dianaiad]

LOL! Fellow christians you are wasting your time talking to a member of the Mormon church! It is a house of deciet ran by deciet and no truth will come out of its mouth. The blind choose to stay blind so let them be! As far as building a lds temple in Rome will only allow gods Catholic church to shine more in his light of truth! How can you know good without evil?

Interesting comment, Jake.

So.

why did you come to a defunct thread and reply to Mormons?

 

[mfbukowski]

Interesting comment, Jake.

So.

why did you come to a defunct thread and reply to Mormons?

Hey, even I got a reply to this one- that shows you how old this thread is!

 

[jake23]

Interesting comment, Jake.

So.

why did you come to a defunct thread and reply to Mormons?

I think the bigger question is why on earth do you spend so much time on a Catholic website? My post is for those that are not of the occolt