My Sister is Mormon....

[Stephen168]

When one relates a personal experience, and the listener calls it a ‘fanciful tale,’ that can generally, and and fairly safely, be interpreted as calling it a lie, Diana.

A person tells a story about meeting God, Christ, and some angels and they all told him to start a new religion. The people that hear the story repeat it. I hear it from one of the people and tell them it is a fanciful story. I’m not calling the person that told me the story a liar. I might think them gullible but not necessarily a liar.

The only thing that seems personal about your experience is someone personally told you a story. I could be wrong.

 

[dianaballein]

Yes this is because Catholicism has changed. In the old days the catechumens were not even allowed into the cathedral either. That is what the separate baptistries were for, where they conducted the mass of the catechumens.

Even in your present ceremonies to become catholic, aren’t catechumens supposed to technically leave mass ceremonially at some point? (I know anyone can attend a full mass- I am talking ceremony here)

And even that practice was a relic of the original practice, which is what we practice. Ever been to Florence or another european cathedral where the baptistry is a separate building? That’s why.

I am a Candidate (Catechumens are folks who also need baptism) and both I and my daughter the Catechumen are perfectly welcome to remain in church for the entire Mass.

 

[dianaiad]

(perk)
Where in the world did I write 'tragically ironic" anywhere?

Never mind, I found where I wrote 'tragically ironic."

I’ve been too busy and written too many posts to this group!

 

[dianaiad]

It is generally good to keep things in context, and continually comparing the Cross to a swastika is blasphemy.

I wasn’t comparing the swastika to the cross, Diana. I was using the swastika to illustrate how symbols can have different meanings, and how those meanings can change, sometimes very drastically.

In fact, your reaction of ‘blasphemy’ here is a very good illustration of that. when my grandmother made her swastika quilt, no Catholic or other Christian would have considered a comparison between the meaning of the cross and the meaning of the swastika to be a bit blasphemous. Unlikely, perhaps, but since the meaning of the swastika THEN was ‘life, peace and godliness,’ it wouldn’t have been a blasphemy.

NOW, of course, it is…because the meaning of the swastika has been so changed, so sullied, and so painted with the blood of millions that its millenia old meaning is totally destroyed, and will never be restored.

But since I wasn’t equating the two as meaning the same thing, ‘blasphemy’ doesn’t apply.

 

[dianaiad]

“Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the prophets, seers, revelators’ of the church, is cultivating the spirit of apostacy. One cannot speak evil of the lord’s annointed… and retain the holy spirit in his heart. This sort of game is Satan’s favorite pastime, and he has practiced it to believing souls since Adam. He {Satan} wins a great victory when he can get members of the church to speak against their leaders and to do their own thinking.”

“When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan–it is God’s Plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give directions, it should mark the end of controversy, God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God.”

Ward Teachers Message, Deseret News, Church Section p. 5, May 26, 1945
Also included in the Improvement Era, June 1945

The “Ward Teachers Message” written by one ward leader with his own opinion, in a publication that is over fifty years old. Not canonized. Not repeated by general authority of the church. Taken out of context.

Why do you guys do this?

It doesn’t matter WHAT the President of the church might say, or any apostle, or any conference talk, or our scriptures, or indeed any of us who says differently…this little bit of over the top rhetoric by an insignificant writer is considered to be Mormon canon by you, because it suits you.

Never mind that it is simply an over the top bit of rhetoric that remains the opinion of that particular writer and is not church doctrine OR policy, it serves your purposes, so…trot it out.

You need to be a bit more careful about that, because Catholicism (and every other Christian religion, for that matter) has an equally long history of people with very big mouths and bigger feet to shove in them. Shall we have a 'things your side have said that are truly stupid" war?

You’ve been around longer. You’ll have a longer list.

 

[dianaiad]

A person tells a story about meeting God, Christ, and some angels and they all told him to start a new religion. The people that hear the story repeat it. I hear it from one of the people and tell them it is a fanciful story. I’m not calling the person that told me the story a liar. I might think them gullible but not necessarily a liar.

The only thing that seems personal about your experience is someone personally told you a story. I could be wrong.

What was fanciful about being told not to break his promise regarding the confessional? What was ‘fanciful’ about my telling you that he met with a general authority of the church before his baptism, so that he could be told (assured?) that he was not to violate that promise?

Or are you saying that it was a ‘fanciful story’ that the man WAS a former priest?

What exactly is it that you are calling ‘fanciful?’

 

[RebeccaJ]

Anyway, I explain in a general way what occurrs. As you can see above, the details are rather boring anyway, but that is what we don’t reveal.

lol, so sacred that they hardly matter.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

The point is, if Mormons are not allowed to participate in the Eucharist, then criticism of us for not allowing you to participate in our Temple ceremonies is a bit hard to defend, don’t you think?

Participation is one thing. Being allowed to observe a practice is another.

You should know the difference.

As to the Holy Eucharist: if as the other mormon poster wrote, non-mormons are free to take communion with mormons on Tuesdays, then it begs the question as to the sacramental nature of the mormon ‘communion.’

It also makes mormon ‘baptism’ of the dead, non-believing, and Jewish [like my wife’s relatives] a lot clearer: it means nothing.

Substituted masonic rites for temple ceremonies: open ‘communion’ to any and all [contra Jesus’ teaching in St John’s Gospel and in St Paul’s letters]: imitation of OT rites and tribal customs [plural wives]: special revelations: sui generis ‘scripture’ that has been ‘retranslated’ into English over a dozen times—

well, that’s mormonism.

Robert

 

[RebeccaJ]

Lies. I have PERFORMED these ordinances thousands of times and these are lies. You have yourself said that you were never endowed-- you are dreaming this up

I have had first hand accounts from people who were there. So you can call multiple liars if you like. The fact remains, people stripped naked and wore nothing but a “shield”, open at the sides, and the anointing included another person touching breast, bowel, legs, etc.

Today, the person is fully dressed and only the forehead is touched.

So whatever bukowski, you may have become desensitized, but it isn’t NORMAL.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Good grief, give me a break. I didn’t ask DURING the Mass!!!

During it, I simply enjoyed. It was beautiful. Didn’t understand all of it, but I enjoyed it.

You probably didn’t understand it because it was taken from Scripture.

Throughout the Mass are quotations and prayers from the OT and the NT.

Of course, if we quoted Nephi or Moses or some other mormon book, you would have noticed and had an epiphanic moment about your belief system.

Maybe the Presbytarians or United Methodists use the BoM?

Oh no, it’s the Catholic Lectionary from Vatican II that they use.

Dang Christians!

Robert

 

[RebeccaJ]

The “Ward Teachers Message” written by one ward leader with his own opinion, in a publication that is over fifty years old. Not canonized. Not repeated by general authority of the church. Taken out of context.

Why do you guys do this?

It doesn’t matter WHAT the President of the church might say, or any apostle, or any conference talk, or our scriptures, or indeed any of us who says differently…this little bit of over the top rhetoric by an insignificant writer is considered to be Mormon canon by you, because it suits you.

Never mind that it is simply an over the top bit of rhetoric that remains the opinion of that particular writer and is not church doctrine OR policy, it serves your purposes, so…trot it out.

You need to be a bit more careful about that, because Catholicism (and every other Christian religion, for that matter) has an equally long history of people with very big mouths and bigger feet to shove in them. Shall we have a 'things your side have said that are truly stupid" war?

You’ve been around longer. You’ll have a longer list.

Hi, the Improvement Era was a publication of the LDS Church. The New Era is the publication that replaced the Improvement Era. Do LDS people subscribe to LDS-published magazines? Why? What do LDS expect from them?

 

[look3467]

Mormons, Jehovah’s witnesses are in my family.

At first I tried to convert them all to my way of thinking (Southern Baptist) to my only causing alienation.

I am now just a believer in God by Jesus Christ.

I love them all and demonstrate it by accepting what they want to believe.

I leave it up to them if they want to alienate themselves due to their institutional beliefs.

I will always love them regardless.

My point, is if your sister chooses to believe in the Mormon beliefs, give her your love above all else.

Let her see that your love has nothing to do with her beliefs, but because God gives you the opportunity to demonstrate His love
in the midst of differences.

That alone will win more converts!

As for the cross, it is a sign of the standard of God’s promise to all mankind.
Isa 49:22 Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.
Isa 62:10 Go through, go through the gates; prepare ye the way of the people; cast up, cast up the highway; gather out the stones; lift up a standard for the people.

The cross is the crossroads between the old and the new.
It is the point in human history that God chose to introduce His Son to the world as the Savior.

Therefore, my understanding is that God has made provisions for every soul to be saved. That was and is His continuing work.

Ours? Is to demonstrate that same love God had for us in Jesus and love our neighbor.

If your soul is secure in Jesus, as mine is, I have no need to worry about not making it to heaven.

My worry should rather be to demonstrate the light of God in a dark world in a compassionate and helpful way so as to win some to His love.

Love your sister unconditionally and let God’s love in you win her to His love.

Peace>>>AJ

 

[majick275]

The “Ward Teachers Message” written by one ward leader with his own opinion, in a publication that is over fifty years old. Not canonized. Not repeated by general authority of the church. Taken out of context.

Why do you guys do this?

you say that but:

Always keep your eye on the President of the church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, even if it is wrong, and you do it, the lord will bless you for it but you don’t need to worry. The lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray."

LDS President Marion G. Romney (of the first presidency), quoting LDS President (and prophet) Heber J. Grant “Conference Report” Oct. 1960 p. 78

“The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer you to be led astray if you are found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother’s arms, as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray, for if they should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them from the earth.”

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 9, p. 289, 1862.

“When the Prophet speaks the debate is over”.

N. Eldon Tanner, August Ensign 1979, pages 2-3

“I sat in this tabernacle some years ago as President Joseph Fielding Smith stood at this pulpit. It was the general priesthood meeting of April 1972, the last general conference before President Smith passed away. He said: ‘There is one thing which we should have exceedingly clear in our minds. Neither the President of the Church, nor the First Presidency, or the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve will ever lead the Saints astray or send forth counsel to the world that is contrary to the mind and will of the lord’.”

L. Aldin Porter of the Presidency of the First Quorum of Seventies (Ensign, Nov. 1994, p. 63)

“Follow your leaders who have been duly ordained and have been publicly sustained, and you will not be led astray.”

Boyd K. Packer (General Conference, Oct. 1992; Ensign, Nov. 1992)

“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray.”

President Wilford Woodruff (considered scripture as it is canonized at the end of the D&C)

It doesn’t matter WHAT the President of the church might say, or any apostle, or any conference talk, or our scriptures, or indeed any of us who says differently…this little bit of over the top rhetoric by an insignificant writer is considered to be Mormon canon by you, because it suits you.

no it’s because i have witnessed it. you want to claim to be led by direct revelation where the “prophet” literally asks God questions and then receives direct answers yet you then want to say they are just men, it doesn’t matter what they say, etc…

Never mind that it is simply an over the top bit of rhetoric that remains the opinion of that particular writer and is not church doctrine OR policy, it serves your purposes, so…trot it out.

i think the point well supported by multiple LDs leaders. think about those temple recommend interview questions and what they mean.

You need to be a bit more careful about that, because Catholicism (and every other Christian religion, for that matter) has an equally long history of people with very big mouths and bigger feet to shove in them. Shall we have a 'things your side have said that are truly stupid" war?

You’ve been around longer. You’ll have a longer list.

yet we don’t claim to be “oracles of the lord” speaking as if it were God himself. bit of a difference there.

 

[mystified]

While in the Army, one of my jobs–talk about multitasking!–was as a Catholic Chaplalin’s Assistant. In this position I came in contact with a lot of differeent people, including chaplains of many faiths. I once asked a Mormon chaplain the “cross question” and did not get as simple an answer as Mr. Hinckley has given. He made certain that the “convertible cross” (plain on one side for the non-Catholic Christian services and corpus on the other for Catholic services) was not in view while he condcuted LDS services…while wearing his Army officer’s uniform with Chaplain Corps crosses on the lapels.
My favorite non-Catholic chaplain was the rabbi (they don’t wear crosses but Ten Commandments tablets).

 

[NewSeeker]

Originally Posted by RebeccaJ View Post
No one was told before hand that you would stand there wearing nothing but a poncho while people touched your naked body, including private areas.

Lies. I have PERFORMED these ordinances thousands of times and these are lies. You have yourself said that you were never endowed-- you are dreaming this up

Rebecca’s description is 99% correct. I was endowed in January 1985 in the Jordan River temple and wore the white poncho with open sides (and nothing else underneath) while the Washing and Anointing ordinance was performed. A very old man performed the ritual (I remember his hands were very wrinkled and shook a bit). He would touch each body part mentioned in the blessing in turn, except for the loins (thankfully! that did NOT happen). Instead, when the blessing on my loins was pronounced, the ordinance worker touched my lower back.

NS

 

[look3467]

While in the Army, one of my jobs–talk about multitasking!–was as a Catholic Chaplalin’s Assistant. In this position I came in contact with a lot of differeent people, including chaplains of many faiths. I once asked a Mormon chaplain the “cross question” and did not get as simple an answer as Mr. Hinckley has given. He made certain that the “convertible cross” (plain on one side for the non-Catholic Christian services and corpus on the other for Catholic services) was not in view while he condcuted LDS services…while wearing his Army officer’s uniform with Chaplain Corps crosses on the lapels.
My favorite non-Catholic chaplain was the rabbi (they don’t wear crosses but Ten Commandments tablets).

Lets trade the cross for love?

I mean, after all, was that not the ultimate demonstration of it?

Consider it (cross) our burden in spreading the love that was so dearly given at a great cost: to our neighbors as intended.

Wear a cross or not, what matters is what is inside of you.

Peace>>>AJ

 

[mfbukowski]

I am from Southern California (GO ANGELS). Boyd Jensen and I were friends throughout Law School at Pepperdine, Malibu. His dad is a big something or other with your church.

I am VERY familiar with mormonism. And yes, I am a Catholic.

The Holy Eucharist becomes so (with the wine) upon the epiclesis from the priest-celebrant. That priest has received his Orders from a Bishop who received his Orders from a Bishop back to Whozzit in the 1st century. That is Apostolic Succession.

Without it, the bread and the wine DO NOT become the Body and Blood of Christ.

That has been taught in the Church (both Catholic and Orthodox) for about 20 centuries.

What others do is a mere memorial, there is no changing of the bread and wine into the Body and the Blood of Christ.

That is the difference, my friend.

Sure it’s not fair: it’s what Jesus taught His Disciples (our first Bishops who taught their successors who taught their successors, and so forth).

When things aren’t fair or to our liking, some of us start our own religions.

Robert

You are not familiar with Mormonism or you would know that playing basketball in a stake center is an accepted and encouraged activity. Pretty basic stuff. All of them include gymnasium facilities especially basketball courts.

We have been over all these issues hundreds of times on this forum, and probably will not respond. I will leave it to others willing to take it on for a hundreth and one time.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

You are not familiar with Mormonism or you would know that playing basketball in a stake center is an accepted and encouraged activity. Pretty basic stuff. All of them include gymnasium facilities especially basketball courts.

We have been over all these issues hundreds of times on this forum, and probably will not respond. I will leave it to others willing to take it on for a hundreth and one time.

There you go again: avoiding direct questions.

I have played basketball in mormon “gyms.” Our parish teams quit the ecumenical attempt at understanding when the mormons of Riverside, California, refused to have non-mormon referees on the court during games. After two games of non-calls, it was apparent that this was revenge for Notre Dame kicking BYU’s butt on the gridiron.

Gee, I haven’t seen such traveling since my active duty days in the Army!

Robert

 

[mfbukowski]

“Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the prophets, seers, revelators’ of the church, is cultivating the spirit of apostacy. One cannot speak evil of the lord’s annointed… and retain the holy spirit in his heart. This sort of game is Satan’s favorite pastime, and he has practiced it to believing souls since Adam. He {Satan} wins a great victory when he can get members of the church to speak against their leaders and to do their own thinking.”

“When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan–it is God’s Plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give directions, it should mark the end of controversy, God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God.”

Ward Teachers Message, Deseret News, Church Section p. 5, May 26, 1945
Also included in the Improvement Era, June 1945

First of all, I was proposing none of these things
Secondly, we can always find out for ourselves if our leaders are correct, and
Third, if we disagree we are free to leave the church.

This has nothing to do with the discussion at hand which were the Sethian Mysteries which have nothing to do with what you posted. Very red and very stinky herring.

 

[mfbukowski]

It is generally good to keep things in context, and continually comparing the Cross to a swastika is blasphemy.

Technically a swastika is a cross of a certain type. Look it up