A
- Status
T
TheosisM
Guest
This post shows that you have not actually studied this matter. No one is claiming that the early Christians did the Mass in exactly the same way that it is done today, nor the Tridentine Mass, nor the Divine Liturgy. What they are saying is that there are certain structural parallels between the Mass/Divine Liturgy and early Christian worship. There are also multiple similarities with Jewish temple worship (from church architecture to ceremonial components), and a number of studies have been done on that subject, a number by non-Catholic/Orthodox/Anglican/Lutheran scholars.
M
Marie5890
Guest
And Mormon sacrament meetings dont have this structure with the exception of the sacrament (called “breaking of the bread” in the early Church).
Mormon temple rituals, as we all know, have no connections to the Early Church or even Jewish temple worship for that matter, but has as its roots Masonry.
S
sablouwho
Guest
One of the reasons I feel pulled to the Catholic Church was the liturgy. Because coming from a Jewish background, Catholic mass is the most similar to what it was like going to synagogue as a child.
I’ve been to TLM a few times. I liked it and wasn’t put off by the fact that it’s in Latin. Because, of course, Jewish synagogue worship is done in Hebrew. (Although not totally, there can be some vernacular, particularly in more Reform congregations.)
Just like Catholics, there are times during the service when we stand, sit, bow, etc. (There is no kneeling in synagogue though–there is a reason that this posture is not embraced in Judaism, and I honestly don’t recall what it is.)
And, Jews have an equivalent of the Catholic lectionary…AND like Catholics, we don’t have a copy of our scriptures in the pews.
Let me tell you, going to mass felt like I was in somewhat familiar surrounding after attending the “worship sandwich” type of church service that I experienced at all but the most traditional (e.g. Lutheran/Anglican) Protestant churches that I checked out.
What is the “worship sandwich”, you ask?
*]Praise and worship music (bleck)
*]Sermon (includes pastor-selected Bible readings, follow along in your pew copy!)
*]MORE Praise and worship music (double bleck)
S
sablouwho
Guest
Hi Rebecca. I am not sure that I understand what you mean by what you have said above about human flaws being a detriment to what God can/can’t do. Would you mind explaining this a little bit more? There were a lot of issues and pushbacks that I had when I was contemplating becoming Mormon, but I don’t recall thinking about this particular topic when I was investigating. Thus I’m really curious to understand.
Also, I am pretty new to CAF. I’ve seen you participate in a lot of LDS threads, and it seems you are rather passionate about the topic. And you have a lot of people on these threads who clearly"know" you on the forums. Being new, I am trying to get a feel from where you are coming from…I hope I am not being too personal…just wondering if you might be ex-Mo?
Thanks,
Sablouwho
M
Marie5890
Guest
Thanks for sharing Sablouwho, we have a Jewish catechuman going thru RCIA right now to be baptized at the Easter vigil who has said the same thing.
That familiarity of their childhood. We all know Jesus was a Jew. As were His apostles and many of the early Christians.
I think one thing that many dont consider is that these Jewish Christians didnt stop being Jewish or drop Jewish traditions the moment they were baptized. They would even still attend synagogue.
They werent setting out to start a whole new religion. They saw Christ, as they should, as fullfilling the OT. Christian worship is born of Jewish worship.
S
spn82756
Guest
LDS belief in the divine potential of man
Divinity, or divine nature, relates to deity, or the nature of God. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe in a plan of eternal progression through which people can develop characteristics of divinity. In other words, men can become God-like.
The teachings of the LDS Church include the belief in the divine potential of men and women, who were spirit children of Heavenly Father during the pre-existence, or pre-mortal life in heaven. The belief is that God the Father is the Supreme Being and Supreme Ruler of the universe, and that progress through choices and growth in understanding by His spirit children occurred during pre-mortal life in varying degrees, based on each individual spirit’s inclination toward truth, light, love, and faith.
LDS teaching is that Jesus Christ was the Firstborn of Heavenly Father during the pre-mortal life, and that Christ’s ability to obey truth, perceive light, and act in love and faith distinguished Him in that pre-mortal existence as being God-like. In fact, Christ became a God during the pre-mortal existence and serves as the executor of God’s will, the creator of worlds without end. Because of Christ’s love for Heavenly Father’s other spirit children, He offered to accept the mission on earth of acting throughout His life in a sinless way and overcoming the eternal law of justice by suffering the punishment for the sins of all of mankind through the infinite atonement, which only He would be able to accomplish. He was not only a spirit son of God, but the physical offspring of God the Father, inheriting power over death and the power to suffer in a magnitude far greater than mortal man could suffer. Thus, Christ’s mission became a foreordained part of the Plan of Salvation for all of mankind.
The LDS belief is that Christ’s divinity and sinlessness qualified Him to return to the presence of Heavenly Father after His death, inheriting a resurrected and perfected body and rejoining with the Father in being omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent. They love all of mankind unconditionally. Thus, Christ offers a way whereby others of God’s spirit children may be perfected. Because of the atonement, as men and women repent and rely wholly on the merits of Christ’s grace, they can develop some of the attributes of God, such as patience, purity, and charity. After death, all people go to the Spirit World, where progression continues. In the Spirit World, people still have agency, the ability to learn, the ability to make choices. At the resurrection, all will receive a perfected, resurrected body; this is Christ’s gift to all mankind. After the resurrection comes judgment, wherein men and women are assigned kingdoms and mansions in heaven commensurate with their faith and deeds on earth. Progression continues, as the souls of men proceed to gain ever more knowledge. Through eternal progression, characteristics of deity, or divinity, can be forever added upon. Men and women can become as God, sharing His attributes. When Christ said that the righteous could inherit all he has, he meant all, including his attributes.
Now that is not quite the Christian belief in Christ’s divinity.
As far as you saying your beginning to believe LDS have a greater belief in Christ’s divinity…I think you’re lost.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I had to delete part of your post to fit a response.
The same authority in Matthew 16 was differentiated by the giving of the keys. The other Apostles guessed Jesus was Elias or John the Baptist. The Father chose Peter by revealing to Him that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
**Mat 16:17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. **
From there anyone can see that Jesus was addressing Peter. He did not say, ‘I give to the 12’, ‘I give to all of you’, or ‘I give to my disciples’, the keys. He stated:
**Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. **
This was the first announcment of the Church. The second mention of ‘binding and loosing’ was in the Church’s authority to settle disputes. You can withhold communion and communion will be withheld in heaven, you can give communion and communion will be with heaven. With the keys, Peter received doctrinal authority that through those teachings, heaven would be open or shut.
Peter used the term 3 times and he used terms putting himself as equal to those who served but were not eye witnesses to the suffering of Christ.
The differences in the use of ‘Apostles’ is attributed to different writing styles of the authors, as well as their own knowledge of the Greek language.
John was humble and would not have questiioned the Lord on His decisions.
Peter was also a humble man. When Christ appeared to them and instructed Peter to tend to His flock, 3 times, Peter seemingly felt others were more deserving.
Joh 21:21 Him therefore when Peter had seen, he saith to Jesus: Lord, and what shall this man do?
Joh 21:22 Jesus saith to him: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? Follow thou me.
Joh 21:23 This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die. And Jesus did not say to him: He should not die; but: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee?
The Lord had a plan for each of His followers. And while we’re looking at this passage (and you did not respond to where the belief that John did not die comes from) note, that this was misinterpreted by some who understood that John would not die and would remain till the Lord come again. John, himself, corrected this error in thinking and explained it, ‘And Jesus did not say to him: He should not die; but: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee?’
Some would claim to read the Bible literally, but cannot see the literal context of the keys and mistake the interpretation of the above passage.
What was the plan for John?
Joh 19:26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son.
Joh 19:27 After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own.
Jesus wanted John, whom the Lord loved, to care for the ark of the new and everlasting covenant, His own mother.
It would be interesting to know where you get that James was dead when Paul was appointed. In Acts 9, we see:
**Act 9:10 Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias. And the Lord said to him in a vision: Ananias, And he said: Behold I am here, Lord.
Act 9:17 And Ananias went his way and entered into the house. And laying his hands upon him, he said: Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus hath sent me, he that appeared to thee in the way as thou camest, that thou mayest receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Act 9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it were scales: and he received his sight. And rising up, he was baptized.**
In Acts 21 we see:
Act 21:17 And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.
Act 21:18 And the day following, Paul went in with us unto James: and all the ancients were assembled.
James, bishop of Jerusalem, and all the ancients were assembled and Paul, already received the imposition of hands and filled with the Holy Ghost.
ParkerD,
I hate to keep repeating certain questions or points, but it appears they are being overlooked or ignored.
How does the Mormon Church have the authority to appoint ‘Apostles’? What differentiates the difference between those and the original Apostles?
Who was the ‘quorum’ of Apostles, necessary in your view, to appoint other Apostles at the beginning of the ‘restoration’, specifically the founding of the Mormon Church?
Lastly, just a point and not a question, it’s ironic that the Mormon Church claims the loss of a valid priesthood at the death of the last Apostle, yet they believe Apostle John did not die. This seems to indicate a non-belief in Christ’s words or intentions. Why would Christ ‘translate’ the last Apostle who clearly could have saved His Church through His priesthood? To claim a quorum was necessary certainly appears, to me, to be an excuse of convenience.
S
spn82756
Guest
And even further…it is possible for a pope to live a very sinful life…but as you said…when it comes to teaching about faith and morals he is guided by the Holy Spirit. To teach incorrectly would make Jesus a lier. Jesus said the gates of hell would never prevail against His Church.God bless you again, Dianaiad.
You are incorrect about Papal infallibility.
The Holy Spirit will prevent the Pope from making an erroneous infallible teaching about faith and morals, how The Holy Spirit will do that is not known.
It may be possible for the Pope to think and attempt to teach error, but he will be prevented by the Holy Spirit somehow.
S
spn82756
Guest
Of course…if priests forgive in persona Christi then all have the keys to bound and loose. They are all in Apostolic Succession.
S
sablouwho
Guest
Thanks! (Takes a little bow
)This very topic is one that I struggled with. And I felt that none of my LDS friends/acquaintances (except for one) is comfortable trying to help me sort that one out. They seemed to dismiss it or to be uncomfortable with it. And I say this gently, because I really have had very good experiences with LDS people, and I appear to be in a minority view in that I do consider them Christians, although granted, in a very non-traditional way.
Of course, asking “which” version of BoM-following LDS groups/sects/break-aways is the correct one has it’s problems. Because a skeptic can ask about traditional Christianity in the same exact manner. And it would be a shame for a skeptic to not come to faith in Jesus due to the fractured state of Christianity. (I have seen Jews make this argument on a counter-missionary apologetics website whose mission was to "keep Jews Jewish.)
Absolutely. I was just using the famous rock passage from Matthew as an example. It can definitely be expanded to the Bible as a whole.
That is why I think the OP’s query is such an interesting question. Because clearly, prayer and study leads earnest people who seek Jesus to come to different conclusions, and leads them to different churches. (And then there are those who seeks God but don’t ever develop faith in Jesus…)
Personally, because of this I have a very hard time buying the idea that there is One true church. Because EACH Church can just dismiss those who don’t join their ranks to say “well, you didn’t study/pray/educate yourself hard enough–if only you did more, in earnest, you would come to the conclusion that WE are right.”
I have received that very sort of attitude from some LDS, as well as from some Catholics. (Not to mention Jews who cannot understand why I’ve become Christian). And I do believe that each person who said this to me really believed it themselves, and that all (even the ones who are “meanies” about it) genuinely seek after God.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
hello sablouwho, I converted from atheism (was raised LDS). I had a single prayer going for a long time: lead me to you. I know another convert who prayed in addition to that: to be protected from what is false.Yes, I realize I’m quoting myself
Going back to my “Hey God, is Jesus the real deal or what?” prayer, which I mentioned upthread… The answer that I got to my prayer, which was “Yeah, he’s the real deal!”
But that answer did NOT point to any specific Church or denomination. All it showed me was that Jesus is “da man”.
Thus far, no subsequent amount of additional prayer on my part has pointed to a specific Church/denom. Scripture study hasn’t done the trick either–I’ve seen good arguments from both Catholic and Protestant apologists re: Matthew 16:18, etc.
(However, I have recently come to appreciate the idea of Mary/Saints intercession, as well as the Real Presence in the Eucharist).
My reasons for becoming Catholic (as opposed to joining the LDS, or remaining a “generic” Christian) have more to do with a deep pull I feel to this particular expression of Christianity than anything else. I realize that this is likely a way more “liberal” viewpoint than the majority of Catholic posters here on CAF…oh well. It’s the best I can do.
Not that anybody actually here asked me why I was becoming Catholic. I guess I felt the need to state this more for my own self…
I too felt that pull to Catholicism.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Catholic: The Sacraments are made valid by Christ. If the bishop/priest/deacon celebrating a particular Sacrament has committed a mortal sin and not sought Reconciliation, the Sacrament remains valid because of the Priesthood of Jesus Christ (Himself, not as a description of Priesthood).
Mormon: A Sacrament is made invalid by a mormon priesthood holder if that person has committed a mortal sin.
An example in regards to this thread is Holy Orders. This Sacrament is made valid by our High Priest, Jesus Christ. The Bishop who confers Holy Orders does not make this Sacrament invalid by his particular sin(s) that have not been forgiven. This is essentially the argument mormons present for why Christ’s Church failed, that is, the priesthood was made invalid by individual sin, to a point where there was no priesthood left.
I noticed the inconsistency of this when I was still young, in my teens. As I knew certain people were dirty as hell, still all acting like they were as pious as you can get. So, according to mormons themselves, they had no priesthood authority. This is one of the reasons I left that house of cards for atheism.
M
Marie5890
Guest
Rebecca, to be honest, I was taught the exact opposite. That even if the priesthood holder was guilty of some grievous sin, the sacrament, be in baptism, confirmation, blessing of the sacrament, etc. was valid.
I would need verification that what you are claiming is infact, Mormon doctrine. Because I think you are wrong in this claim.
S
sablouwho
Guest
Thanks Rebecca, for sharing thishello sablouwho, I converted from atheism (was raised LDS). I had a single prayer going for a long time: lead me to you. I know another convert who prayed in addition to that: to be protected from what is false.
I too felt that pull to Catholicism.
and putting up with the newbie!I like the “lead me to you” prayer. I prayed similarly myself. Boy did the answer surprise me!
I didn’t actually pray the “protect me from falsehoods” one, but I think that’s a good one too!
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
D&C 121
36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
Apostasy
“After the deaths of the Savior and His Apostles, men corrupted the principles of the gospel and made unauthorized changes in Church organization and priesthood ordinances. Because of this widespread apostasy, the Lord withdrew the authority of the priesthood from the earth.”
How is something done without valid priesthood authority?
M
Marie5890
Guest
I appreciate you citing why you have come to that conclusion that the ordinances are invalid.
But Mormons dont teach that, if the priesthood holders who are administering baptism or blessing the sacrament, if they are living a sinful life, means that those ordinance are invalid.
That is your conclusion. I understand why you have come to that conclusion based on the LDS scriptures you pointed to.
But that isn’t what Mormons believe that those ordinances are invalid. That is your conclusion, not theirs.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Yes Marie, the inconsistencies in mormonism are numerous.I appreciate you siting why you have come to that conclusion that the ordinances are invalid.
But Mormons dont teach that, if the priesthood holders who are administering baptism or blessing the sacrament, if they are living a sinful life, means that those ordinance are invalid.
That is your conclusion. I understand why you have come to that conclusion based on the LDS scriptures you pointed to.
But that isn’t what Mormons believe that those ordinances are invalid. That is your conclusion, not theirs.
a)Christ’s Church failed because men were not righteous enough to hold the priesthood.
b)Mormonism stands in spite of this fact.
To blindly accept the contradiction is what it means to be mormon. OH, and to actually point out that “the brethren” are exhibiting any sort of sin…this is apostasy.
baaaaaaa
M
Marie5890
Guest
As long as you are clear that they still believe their ordinances to be valid regardless of the state of the priesthood holder administering that ordinance.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
lol. sure. even if their scriptures say otherwise. and their concept of a “great apostasy” is dependent on saying our are not!As long as you are clear that they still believe their ordinances to be valid regardless of the state of the priesthood holder administering that ordinance.
What is the definition of mormon doctrine again?
:hypno:
- Status