News Article: Mormon aversion to the cross due to the anti-Catholicism of their leaders

  • Thread starter Thread starter PaulDupre
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, put yourself in the position of the Fanchers. For quite a few weeks you have had, traveling with you, a group of men who portrayed the Mormons as bloodthirsty barbarians who were utterly beneath contempt; not even human–so much so that they bragged with great glee about their own involvement in several of the murders committed against Mormons: Haun’s Mill, the Carthage mob and the murder of Parley P Pratt. They then spent a good deal of time bragging further about what they would do when they got to Salt Lake; they would 'finish the job." Then they broke off from the train before it entered Utah and the braggarts took a route that did NOT get them near Salt Lake.

Wouldn’t you, being a reasonably intelligent person, figure that traveling through a state full of such evil people would be fraught with danger, and it would be a good idea to be a little discrete? The Fanchers were anything BUT that.

The Fanchers got there, and were warned that A: there was unrest in Utah because there was an army coming; nobody would be allowed to sell supplies to them because they were preparing for a possible invasion; B: that the Mormons knew what the men who had BEEN with them had been bragging about, and were understandably not pleased; therefore it would probably be wiser for them to stay put for awhile or take that other route.

Wouldn’t you, being a reasonably intelligent person, put this information together with what your recent travelers claimed, and figure that discretion would be a good idea? That is, if you are traveling in a war zone, and had just been in company with men who were dedicated and deadly enemies of the people whose supplies you want to purchase, you should be a little careful about insisting that the about-to-be-invaded folks sell you their supplies and ammunition?

“Discretion” seemed to be a foreign word to the Fanchers. Now, having been so warned, and KNOWING that they weren’t going to be sold supplies, they stopped to buy them anyway, and proceeded to make obnoxious and insulting remarks (including threatening to send the militia from the south…from California.) in at least one town because nobody would sell them supplies.

Now wouldn’t you, being a reasonably intelligent person, add all the preceding up in your head and realize that a group of people about to be invaded by HALF the US Army might not be real thrilled about having another force attacking them from another front? Wouldn’t you treat them with the courtesy you would treat a rattler with his tail buzzing?

But no; the Fanchers treated them with a high handed condescension and disrespect that must have REALLY frosted a group of people that had lost husbands, wives, children, property and homes to people with attitudes just like theirs, and who were threatening to send people to take more of the same away from them. Like I said…stupid.

the Fanchers SAW all this. They HEARD all this, but they didn’t listen, and they didn’t believe; they thought that—heaven alone knows what they thought.

No, the Mormons absolutely were wrong to attack them. The massacre was a horrendous blight on our history, and a horrific thing to do. NOBODY deserves the fate the Fanchers got, not for just being stupid. One must, however, note the stupidity, since our noses are being rubbed in it so completely. I read the accounts of the Fancher trip, and if there was a single opportunity to offend the Mormons, the Fanchers did not pass it up. They didn’t MEAN to…their bigotry was innocent. Their stupidity lay in their refusal to amend it, and to pay attention to the warnings they were given.

So they paid the price owed by many other people, and those who attacked them wreaked vengeance upon innocents.
This sounds alot like the following if you make the changes.
Now if those who are attempting to justify Joseph’s( change to Franchers) murder could say the same thing…but they can’t. They honestly think that those murders in Carthage (change to MM) were justified and acceptable.
I don’t believe you (or the people talking about JS’s murder) are trying to justify it, but your post looks just as much like justification as theirs. Yes I know you said the Mormons were wrong but others here have said the same thing about those who killed JS and you don’t accept it.🤷
 
You realize PaulDupre was being facetious, right?
Hello GodIsGracious! Good evening to you. 🙂

Essentially I was saying that I hope that he doesn’t really feel what he is expressing in his post. In other words, I hope he isn’t serious and is only being sarcastic.

Thanks for the question.

Kind Regards,
Finrock
 
Yes, he knows. He is using his sicky-sweet demeanor as a weapon. Another Mormon passive-agressive tactic.
Hello PaulDupre! I hope you are well today.

I realize you don’t like my religion and such, but I don’t mind that you don’t. I’m happy to converse with you no matter how much you may dislike my religion and everything to do with it. I don’t have any weapon in my hand, aggressive or otherwise. I’m simply trying to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, treat them with respect, to be kind, gentle, and humble. I am possitive I fail at that very often, but those are the things I have been taught my whole life and I believe in those principles. I think it is what Jesus would want me to do, so that is what I try to do.

But, even so, if you think I’m being insincere, I can’t help that. I can only help what I do and how I am and I will continue to treat you with kindness and respect because you are my brother. 🙂

Kind Regards,
Finrock
 
Interesting. I did not know this. I knew that the Mormon church was anti-Catholic but I did not know that they were that anti-Catholic. I remember once I invited a couple of missionaries over for a debate. They weren’t convinced by my arguments (at least not visibly) and they were quite anti-Catholic as well.
 
Interesting. I did not know this. I knew that the Mormon church was anti-Catholic but I did not know that they were that anti-Catholic. I remember once I invited a couple of missionaries over for a debate. They weren’t convinced by my arguments (at least not visibly) and they were quite anti-Catholic as well.
I would have to say that in the last few years Mormons have become less anti-Catholic as they’ve realized that stopping gay marriage and other moral problems will require working with other Christians, especially Catholics. I also think that there are more and more Mormons discovering the difficulties inherent in Mormon history. They remain faithful to Mormonism, but without the hard edge the older folks had 30 years ago. I talked to a Mormon branch president who essentially told me he had quit reading LDS Church history because of all of the problems he was discovering. He just accepted the Book of Mormon and let the rest go.
 
Interesting. I did not know this. I knew that the Mormon church was anti-Catholic but I did not know that they were that anti-Catholic. I remember once I invited a couple of missionaries over for a debate. They weren’t convinced by my arguments (at least not visibly) and they were quite anti-Catholic as well.
I don’t think that the mormon church is anticatholic. Of course being a restoration church which claims that an apostacy occured would make them anti, I suppose. Now of course, the catholic church does not consider the lds church to be christian. So, I would assume that the catholic church is antimormon. Right? And as you can see on this section of the forum, the catholics seem to be antimormon. Right?

The mormon aversion to the cross had very little to do with catholicm. The cross is not catholic but a cross with a crucified Christ is. The cross was basically used by protestants but they did not have a crucified christ on their cross because they considered Christ to be risen.

And so, the chief argument of this thread is flawed.

How can one be catholic and mormon? Well, it is quite simple: born in the catholiic faith, made my communion and confirmation. Joined the lds church as a teenager and now attend mass once more and the lds services at times. Since neither recognizes the other baptism, I am both. 🙂
 
I would have to say that in the last few years Mormons have become less anti-Catholic as they’ve realized that stopping gay marriage and other moral problems will require working with other Christians, especially Catholics. I also think that there are more and more Mormons discovering the difficulties inherent in Mormon history. They remain faithful to Mormonism, but without the hard edge the older folks had 30 years ago. I talked to a Mormon branch president who essentially told me he had quit reading LDS Church history because of all of the problems he was discovering. He just accepted the Book of Mormon and let the rest go.
LDS history is quite young and so it is still up close. The catholics had the same problem with the reformation. Many left the fold because of history. Now, the reformation is long past and no one or very few leave catholicism over history.

Those mormons who leave because of history miss the boat. History is made by people. And people are not perfect.

fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2004_I_Dont_Have_a_Testimony_of_the_History_of_the_Church.html

The above is an interesting link about it all.
 
So it is OK for non-Mormons to accurately present history? I appreciate your statement.
 
Now of course, the catholic church does not consider the lds church to be christian. So, I would assume that the catholic church is antimormon. Right? And as you can see on this section of the forum, the catholics seem to be antimormon. Right?
It is not that the Church is “anti-mormon” because she “thinks” mormons aren’t christian, it is because the Catholic Church has the Truth, as revealed to her by Jesus Christ and that mormons, as a religion, do not. So to say that the Catholic Church is “anti-mormon” is a false statement. There is no such thing possible for the Catholic Church. It is, however, correct to say that mormons are committing heresy and are in apostasy.

Now, there may be people who are anti-mormon, but that’s a different thing all together.
 
LDS history is quite young and so it is still up close. The catholics had the same problem with the reformation. Many left the fold because of history. Now, the reformation is long past and no one or very few leave catholicism over history.

Those mormons who leave because of history miss the boat. History is made by people. And people are not perfect.

fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2004_I_Dont_Have_a_Testimony_of_the_History_of_the_Church.html

The above is an interesting link about it all.
The difference is that Mormon historic problems have to do with the very foundation of the Mormon Church. Catholic historic problems generally began occurring in the Middle Ages when the Catholic Church was already well established.
 
And illiteracy and inavailability of the Bible over many generations, plus a crisis of faith brought about by the Bubonic plague. Those factors would mess up any Church.
 
Interesting. I did not know this. I knew that the Mormon church was anti-Catholic but I did not know that they were that anti-Catholic. I remember once I invited a couple of missionaries over for a debate. They weren’t convinced by my arguments (at least not visibly) and they were quite anti-Catholic as well.
Good morning Holly3278! I’m hoping your day has started out great. 🙂

The article is interesting, however, I don’t believe that it accurately reflect the Church’s position. In the past and even today, there may be Mormons who were anti-Catholic and/or Mormons who have some aversion to the cross. But, this doesn’t translate to what the Church’s actual position is or what it’s general membership believes as a whole. As is often the case, assumptions like this arise from something that may be true on an individual basis but which cannot be carried over to the whole. The basic issue here is a hasty generalization.

The Church has provided an official commentary on what actually constitutes Church doctrine that is binding on the people. I provide portions of that statement below. I think it will be helpful in recognizing that although some LDS members, even leaders, may have expressed anti-Catholic or anti-cross viewpoints, that doesn’t mean that this is what the Church as a whole teachers or even what the general membership believes.

"Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine…

The Church welcomes inquisitiveness, but the challenge of understanding Mormon doctrine is not merely a matter of accessing the abundant information available. Rather, it is a matter of how this information is approached and examined.

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them…

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.

Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine" (newsroom.lds.org).

Kind Regards,
Finrock
 
It is not that the Church is “anti-mormon” because she “thinks” mormons aren’t christian, it is because the Catholic Church has the Truth, as revealed to her by Jesus Christ and that mormons, as a religion, do not. So to say that the Catholic Church is “anti-mormon” is a false statement. There is no such thing possible for the Catholic Church. It is, however, correct to say that mormons are committing heresy and are in apostasy.

Now, there may be people who are anti-mormon, but that’s a different thing all together.
Good morning GodIsGracious! Thank you for your post. 🙂

You make an interesting point that I believe also reflects this issue here with the Mormon church. With only a few modifications, I would accept your post to accurately reflect the LDS Church’s position towards the Catholic church or any church, for that matter.

It isn’t that the LDS church is anti-Catholic because she thinks Catholics aren’t Christian, but because the LDS church has the whole truth as it has been restored by Jesus Christ in these latter days and that other religions, to include Catholics, do not have the whole truth. So, to say that the LDS church is “anti-catholic” is a false statement. There is no such thing possible for the LDS church. And although I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Catholics are committing heresy (because I believe and the Church teaches to respect and allow all people to worship how, where, or what they may) , they are in apostasy.

Of course, you may find people in the Mormon religion who are anti-Catholic, but I agree that this is a different thing altogether.

Kind Regards,
Finrock
 
Good morning GodIsGracious! Thank you for your post. 🙂

You make an interesting point that I believe also reflects this issue here with the Mormon church. With only a few modifications, I would accept your post to accurately reflect the LDS Church’s position towards the Catholic church or any church, for that matter.

It isn’t that the LDS church is anti-Catholic because she thinks Catholics aren’t Christian, but because the LDS church has the whole truth as it has been restored by Jesus Christ in these latter days and that other religions, to include Catholics, do not have the whole truth. So, to say that the LDS church is “anti-catholic” is a false statement. There is no such thing possible for the LDS church. And although I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Catholics are committing heresy (because I believe and the Church teaches to respect and allow all people to worship how, where, or what they may) , they are in apostasy.

Of course, you may find people in the Mormon religion who are anti-Catholic, but I agree that this is a different thing altogether.

Kind Regards,
Finrock
LOL! You couldn’t come up with this yourself, but had to copy what I said? :rolleyes:

I’ve come back to add this part:

It’s interesting when protestants, who are in apostasy, claim that the Catholic church (from which all supposed “claimed” Christian come) is in apostasy and saying that the Catholic church is corrupt.

It says so in scripture (for those of you who are all about “sola scriptura”) that Jesus Christ will protect His Church, His bride. Why wouldn’t someone want to protect his bride? He said that the gates of Hell (i.e. all evil) will NOT prevail against His Church. When you lay claim that the Catholic church is in apostasy, you claim Jesus is a liar and that He left His bride.

I understand that there are people within the Church who are and were corrupt. It does not, however, make the Church HERSELF corrupt.

Therefore, to say that the Catholic church is in apostasy is 1) a false claim, 2) heresy.

Next, the fact that you used my words for your own argument is completely and totally inline with any apostate who commits heresy against the church. You can try to use the words against Her and Her and members, but it does not mean it applies to you.

I cannot take the word of someone who calls Jesus a liar and, in keeping in line with this thread, continues to deny Jesus’ death on the cross by not acknowledging the crucifix.
 
Good morning Holly3278! I’m hoping your day has started out great. 🙂

The article is interesting, however, I don’t believe that it accurately reflect the Church’s position. In the past and even today, there may be Mormons who were anti-Catholic and/or Mormons who have some aversion to the cross. But, this doesn’t translate to what the Church’s actual position is or what it’s general membership believes as a whole. As is often the case, assumptions like this arise from something that may be true on an individual basis but which cannot be carried over to the whole. The basic issue here is a hasty generalization.

The Church has provided an official commentary on what actually constitutes Church doctrine that is binding on the people. I provide portions of that statement below. I think it will be helpful in recognizing that although some LDS members, even leaders, may have expressed anti-Catholic or anti-cross viewpoints, that doesn’t mean that this is what the Church as a whole teachers or even what the general membership believes.

"Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine…

The Church welcomes inquisitiveness, but the challenge of understanding Mormon doctrine is not merely a matter of accessing the abundant information available. Rather, it is a matter of how this information is approached and examined.

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them…

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.

Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine" (newsroom.lds.org).

Kind Regards,
Finrock
Mormons are in denial about what their leaders have taught in the past so they run and hide behind their standard works. It’s a dodge. Maybe they should clarify it once and for all and write a catechism. That might end all of the confusion.
 
Good idea. The effort of writing a catechism might produce a schism. LOL
I just couldn’t resist such an obvious play on words.
 
Interesting. I did not know this. I knew that the Mormon church was anti-Catholic but I did not know that they were that anti-Catholic. I remember once I invited a couple of missionaries over for a debate. They weren’t convinced by my arguments (at least not visibly) and they were quite anti-Catholic as well.
To be fair, most Protestants are anti-Catholic too. In the days of the infancy of the Mormon religion, almost all Protestant churches in America were strongly anti-Catholic. They called the Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon. These days, both Protestants and Mormons are less anti-Catholic. I think it’s a good thing. People who follow Christ should find commonality with each other not throw stones at each other.
 
May we all give up hatred, and harming others because their beliefs differ from ours. Parker, your change of subject was beautifully timed.

Many Brighamites have an aversion to the cross because they don’t need it. They, instead, metaphorically crucify others to ease their own consciences.

We are talking about forgiveness of sin, folks. It goes deeper than anti-Catholicism.
Jerusha, you never cease to astound me. Did you actually read what you just wrote?

“May we all give up hatred and harming others because their beliefs differ from ours…” followed immediately by saying that “Brighamites” “have an aversion to the cross because they don’t need it” because they “metaphorically crucify others to ease their own consciences?” instead?

Great googly moogly.
 
I very carefully delineate Brighamites from decent LDS people. If you don’t like my terminology, perhaps you would like to read some quotes from BY himself. Learn to live with it. At least I don’t lump all LDS in the same evil basket, as some people do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top