Questions for Your Notre Dame Mormon

  • Thread starter Thread starter NotreDameMormon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NotreDameMormon

Guest
Hello,

I am a student at the University of Notre Dame and a fan of Catholics everywhere. I have many Catholic friends and I attend mass on a regular basis and find it very uplifting and beneficial. The oddity most people find in this is that I am an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons, by nickname).

Despite our membership differences, my Catholic friends and I enjoy a profitable association and uplifting discussion of our mutual faith and trust in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We benefit not only from our agreement but also from discussion of the principles on which our differences are founded. It is often in discussing our differences that we come to a better mutual understanding of the truths of the Gospel and an appreciation for our common understanding and eternal goals.

In the spirit of that mutual benefit, my most esteemed and well versed Catholic associate has encouraged me to post a thread on this website to answer questions regarding the LDS faith and its relation to Catholic doctrine. While I am no LDS scholar, I am reasonably well versed in LDS doctrine and am qualified to discuss items generally. I do not speak on behalf of the Church officially. However, I am an active member in good standing and have years of Church study, teaching, and leadership experience. I believe in open and honest dialog and am happy to answer any questions that I can.

While I wish to answer every question as completely as possible, please understand that time is a factor and I may not be able to answer every question with the length and depth that I would like to. Also, I will not waste valuable time entertaining bloggers who are just looking for a fight. This post is meant to invite questions and progressive discussion, not pointless debate and argument. I appreciate your cooperation in this manner.

That being said, I throw this offering into the pile and hope to hear from you soon. May God bless you in your lives and bless our discussions with His Spirit.
 
Hi. 👋

What do Mormons mean when they talk about “intelligence” and “spirit children”? Was Jesus once a “spirit child”? Was I? If it’s better to be embodied, what about the Holy Spirit?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless,
RyanL
 
My Friends,

At the outset of this new thread I want to thank all of you for your hospitality and participation. I have received a handful of messages from some generous Catholics thanking me for continuing to address their questions. I appreciate your warm thoughts and example.

While a few individuals seek to be offensive and divisive in their questioning, I understand and accept wholeheartedly your testimony that they are not representative of the Spirit and Love of Christ that is found in the Catholic Church.

As we proceed, I want to reemphasize that I am not here to debate or to stir up contention. I am a fan of the Catholic Church and recognize its countless virtues. I have close friends who are Catholic and we share a common faith in Christ and desire to serve Him. In that spirit I am here to answer honest questions that you may have regarding the faith, beliefs, and practices of the LDS Church and its people (often two different things).

While I believe faith should be well informed, that questions should be asked, and that we should all question the answers, I understand, as I hope all of you do, that you cannot learn the truth of anything from its critics. You cannot believe an accurate understanding of the Catholic faith can be learned from studying the arguments of Protestants. While critics may accurately point to areas of concern, ultimately the true statement of what is believed will only be found in the faithful.

In that respect, when a critic says that the LDS believe this or the LDS believe that, or point to critics as sources of final truth, they sell themselves short and reveal themselves as close minded, ignorant, and fearful. The Catholic has the final say on what the Catholic believes. The same is true of the LDS Church.

I appreciate passion and fervor, but only when tempered by reason, courtesy, and Christ-like love. I will not attack or demean your faith, nor will I question your intelligence. I ask the same courtesy of all of you.

If you have a question, please ask it simply, respectfully, and without slant. If you do so, I will answer the question. In answering I will state as best I can the LDS belief and understanding and, if I do compare it with the Catholic understanding, I will compare it as graciously as possible with deference to all of you for explaining the Catholic view better than I can.

Thank you, again. I appreciate your love and continued support. My God bless us all with His Spirit that our conversations will bring us all closer to Him.
 
In 1973, the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released the following statement regarding abortion, which is still applicable today:
“The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.”

This was asked by someone in the other thread, but was only answered with an “Oh Paul” by you.

Why is it ok to kill an unborn child due to the sin of it’s father?

Why can the mother not be counselled for the trauma of rape, and realise she is about to bring a life from God in to the world?

Isn’t life from God precious no matter how it is conceived? All babies are a gift from God.

Do the Mormons believe all babies are a gift from God? If so, how then can you ever say it is ok to kill one, just because it wasn’t conceived with the normal love of both parents?

Thanks
 
This is a quote from mormon.org

After the Apostles and many righteous Church members were killed and other members departed from the truth, the Lord took the priesthood authority and His Church from the earth. Without God’s priesthood authority, the Church no longer functioned as Christ had established it. The ordinances were changed and many plain and simple truths were lost. While many good people and some truth remained, the original Church was lost.

Can you please tell me what year Our Lord took away the priesthood authority, and which Pope at the time was supposedly not worthy according to God to be in charge of His church?
 
NotreDameMormon said:
My Friends,

At the outset of this new thread I want to thank all of you for your hospitality and participation. I have received a handful of messages from some generous Catholics thanking me for continuing to address their questions. I appreciate your warm thoughts and example.

While a few individuals seek to be offensive and divisive in their questioning, I understand and accept wholeheartedly your testimony that they are not representative of the Spirit and Love of Christ that is found in the Catholic Church.

As we proceed, I want to reemphasize that I am not here to debate or to stir up contention. I am a fan of the Catholic Church and recognize its countless virtues. I have close friends who are Catholic and we share a common faith in Christ and desire to serve Him. In that spirit I am here to answer honest questions that you may have regarding the faith, beliefs, and practices of the LDS Church and its people (often two different things).

While I believe faith should be well informed, that questions should be asked, and that we should all question the answers, I understand, as I hope all of you do, that you cannot learn the truth of anything from its critics. You cannot believe an accurate understanding of the Catholic faith can be learned from studying the arguments of Protestants. While critics may accurately point to areas of concern, ultimately the true statement of what is believed will only be found in the faithful.

In that respect, when a critic says that the LDS believe this or the LDS believe that, or point to critics as sources of final truth, they sell themselves short and reveal themselves as close minded, ignorant, and fearful. The Catholic has the final say on what the Catholic believes. The same is true of the LDS Church.

I appreciate passion and fervor, but only when tempered by reason, courtesy, and Christ-like love. I will not attack or demean your faith, nor will I question your intelligence. I ask the same courtesy of all of you.

If you have a question, please ask it simply, respectfully, and without slant. If you do so, I will answer the question. In answering I will state as best I can the LDS belief and understanding and, if I do compare it with the Catholic understanding, I will compare it as graciously as possible with deference to all of you for explaining the Catholic view better than I can.

Thank you, again. I appreciate your love and continued support. My God bless us all with His Spirit that our conversations will bring us all closer to Him.
Click to expand...
I suspect some of us critics were in the LDS Church longer than you’ve been alive. Don’t tell me I don’t have a clear understanding of what the LDS Church teaches – as a former missionary, married in the temple, and Elders Quorum President for five years, I’m sure I know exactly what the Mormon Church teaches. I’ve read all of the priesthood manuals back to the early 70s and taught from them. At BYU my job was to go through conference talks and BYU devotionals back to the mid-1800s and pull out important quotes from LDS General Authorities. I would say I’m pretty well informed. I’ve been through the “I don’t know that we teach that” stage which is simply a Mormon way of trying to cover up its controversial teachings. So I think you can come to me and find out exactly what the LDS Church teaches.
 
RyanL said:
Hi. 👋

What do Mormons mean when they talk about “intelligence” and “spirit children”? Was Jesus once a “spirit child”? Was I? If it’s better to be embodied, what about the Holy Spirit?

Thanks in advance.

God Bless,
RyanL
Click to expand...
Great question. Thanks, RyanL.

Joseph Smith taught that the purest form of anything (matter, etc.) is “intelligence”, that if you break down the make up of atoms, neutrons, photons, etc, the end result is the intelligence of God. It is by intelligence and through intelligence that God made the universe and all that is in it. As BYU’s motto states: “The glory of God is intelligence”.

If I understand it correctly, the Catholic teaching is that God created the universe of out nothing. The LDS believe that God organized all things from intelligence. As it is best understood, God organized all things from the intelligence that emanates from Him. However, it has been said that God organized preexisting intelligence, but that notion is harder to reconcile with revelation and is not taught by the Church.

Suffice it to say, man (both spiritually and physically) and all creation are organized intelligence. That is why the Spirit can communicate with and moves through all things and why faith has physical power. All creation is connected through intelligence and that intelligence is one with God.

Contrary to common thought, the Church does not teach that spirit children of God are the result of some sort of celestial copulation. The Church does teach that we are all the literal offspring of God, and that is where the confusion comes from. In reality, little is known about the process of creation except that is organization of intelligence. Mankind was created in the image of God and after His likeness. That is why we are held to be the literal offspring of God.

The LDS believe all the sons and daughters of God (you and I) were created spiritually, but that remaining in spirit form was not the end of our creation. Mortality had a special role to play in our development. The LDS also believe that Christ was the firstborn spirit child of the Father, created in His express image (mirror), the most righteous, loyal, and obedient.

The Holy Spirit has a special mission to fulfill in helping us keep in communication with God without robbing us of free will. His make up is pure intelligence but we do not know his ultimate end. There is all kind of speculation but the Church doesn’t teach anything on the subject. Officially, we just don’t know, nor do we need to.

I hope this is a helpful answer to your question.
 
NotreDameMormon said:
Suffice it to say, man (both spiritually and physically) and all creation are organized intelligence. As it is best understood, God organized all things from the intelligence that emanates from Him.
Click to expand...
Why, then, would it be proper to call God “the Creator”? Why isn’t it more correct to call God “the Organizer”?
40.png
NDM:
The LDS also believe that Christ was the firstborn spirit child of the Father, created in His express image (mirror), the most righteous, loyal, and obedient.
Click to expand...
How is this reconciled with John 1:1 (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”) If Christ was simply a spirit child, albeit the first one, how could Christ have been God without us, the latter-born spirit children, being God as well? If God’s first spirit child was a god, why aren’t the subsequent spirit children gods as well?

Further, why wouldn’t the Gospel writer say that the Word (Christ) was a God?

Finally, John 1:3 states that “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” If Jesus made all things, why would the Father be the Creator/Organizer and not Jesus?

God Bless,
RyanL
 
kellie said:
In 1973, the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released the following statement regarding abortion, which is still applicable today:
“The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.”

This was asked by someone in the other thread, but was only answered with an “Oh Paul” by you.

Why is it ok to kill an unborn child due to the sin of it’s father?

Why can the mother not be counselled for the trauma of rape, and realise she is about to bring a life from God in to the world?

Isn’t life from God precious no matter how it is conceived? All babies are a gift from God.

Do the Mormons believe all babies are a gift from God? If so, how then can you ever say it is ok to kill one, just because it wasn’t conceived with the normal love of both parents?

Thanks
Click to expand...
I appreciate your dedication to the sanctity of life and the protection of the unborn.

If you would please read carefully the LDS Church’s current statement on the subject, I think you will see that the LDS share your concern. Even the exceptions listed are subject to prayerful consideration and divine guidance, affording innocent life every precaution.

As for your questions, the LDS do not believe is it OK to kill an unborn child because of the sin of it’s father, the mother will be counseled for the trauma of rape, and taught that the life inside her is a child of God, life is not only precious, it is sacred, no matter how it is conceived.

The LDS recognize that good and evil exist as a necessary part of an eternal plan, that God does not want innocent people to suffer from the evil choices of others and that He certainly is not the source of it. When a little girl is raped by her uncle and conceives a child, though God’s eternal law of free will permit the consequences, we cannot say it is what He wanted.

Again, even in that instance, the LDS know every precaution must be taken to save innocent life. But the life in the womb may not be the only innocent life in danger. Circumstances may require one to save the other. In that rare case, God will guide the decision. That is the LDS view.

Thanks for your follow up questions.
 
Is it true that Mormons really believe they will become Gods and will own their own planets? Also, is it true that you believe that God had physical sex with Mary, Jesus’s mother? (and that’s how he was conceived?)
 
RyanL said:
Why, then, would it be proper to call God “the Creator”? Why isn’t it more correct to call God “the Organizer”?

How is this reconciled with John 1:1 (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”) If Christ was simply a spirit child, albeit the first one, how could Christ have been God without us, the latter-born spirit children, being God as well? If God’s first spirit child was a god, why aren’t the subsequent spirit children gods as well?

Further, why wouldn’t the Gospel writer say that the Word (Christ) was a God?

Finally, John 1:3 states that “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” If Jesus made all things, why would the Father be the Creator/Organizer and not Jesus?

God Bless,
RyanL
Click to expand...
Thanks, RyanL.

It is proper to call God “the Creator” because He is the Creator. Joseph Smith only used “organized” to try to illustrate the process of “creation.”

The LDS read John 1:1 to refer to the beginning of the creation of Earth and the mortal existence of man. The LDS read in scripture that, prior to that event, Christ was chosen as Savior and called up and appointed by God to administer the Gospel plan which included the creation of the Earth. At the time of His appointment, Christ was clothed in the power and glory of God and given full authority to carry out the will of the Father.

That is how Christ became a god without us, as you said. But your question is right in that we are all gods by divine lineage. We are created in the image of God for the purpose of becoming like Him.

The Gospel writer correctly noted all attributes of Christ as the Word. He was there in the beginning, He was with God, and He was God.

So, hopefully, you can see that, for the LDS, John 1:3 is accurate when it states that “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made” since, for the LDS “all things” pertains to all things in our mortal sphere and universe.

I hope that is helpful. Thanks, again.
 
jediliz said:
Is it true that Mormons really believe they will become Gods and will own their own planets? Also, is it true that you believe that God had physical sex with Mary, Jesus’s mother? (and that’s how he was conceived?)
Click to expand...
Great questions. Thank you.

For the first question, please see our previous thread discussion.

For the second, it is not true that the LDS believe God had physical sex with Mary. Such a notion is preposterous.

There were reports of this doctrine being taught by Brigham Young and a few others, but such reports were made and kept by the enemies of the Church and are reliable at best. Officially, the Church has never taught this doctrine.

However, assuming that all accounts are true and that early Church leaders did in fact make such statements, it is plain to see that such statements were an attempt to reconcile scripture with their understanding of conception at the time. They believed in the scriptures and the scriptures said the power of the Highest would overshadow her and the child would be the literal Son of God. They believed Christ was the Son of God and they believed the scriptures. Given their understanding of conception, they were willing to believe that if Christ was the literal Son of God, and physical sex was the only way to create His physical presence, so be it.

Again, such doctrine, if truly taught, was pure speculation, obviously false, and is not a teaching of the LDS Church.

Important question. Thanks, again.
 
I’m pretty much ignorant of Mormonism. What would be different/unique about your beliefs that would make someone ‘understand’ that the Mormon beliefs are the truth? Also since their are conflicting claims between the beliefs of Catholics and Mormons, why should we believe the Mormon beliefs?
 
Hi NDM

I’m sorry, I haven’t been here for a while and it looks like you guys have been busy. Maybe you answered it somewhere else, but I didn’t see it…did you see my questions on the previous thread in post #37?

Thanks
 
NotreDameMormon said:
Great questions. Thank you.

For the first question, please see our previous thread discussion.

For the second, it is not true that the LDS believe God had physical sex with Mary. Such a notion is preposterous.

There were reports of this doctrine being taught by Brigham Young and a few others, but such reports were made and kept by the enemies of the Church and are reliable at best. Officially, the Church has never taught this doctrine.
Click to expand...
ND, either you do not know what your church has historically taught (you must be very young), or you are deliberately deceiving us.

See the quotes from your own prophets and apostles here and here.
Please do not patronize us with platitudes. Those of us who spent years in the LDS Church as missionaries, teachers and priesthood leaders know better.

Besides, several LDS on this forum have expressed belief in this doctrine.

Paul
 
By the way, ND, where did you serve your mission? I served mine in the Taiwan-Taipei mission 1977-1979.

Paul
 
NotreDameMormon said:
I appreciate your dedication to the sanctity of life and the protection of the unborn.

If you would please read carefully the LDS Church’s current statement on the subject, I think you will see that the LDS share your concern. Even the exceptions listed are subject to prayerful consideration and divine guidance, affording innocent life every precaution.

As for your questions, the LDS do not believe is it OK to kill an unborn child because of the sin of it’s father, the mother will be counseled for the trauma of rape, and taught that the life inside her is a child of God, life is not only precious, it is sacred, no matter how it is conceived.

The LDS recognize that good and evil exist as a necessary part of an eternal plan, that God does not want innocent people to suffer from the evil choices of others and that He certainly is not the source of it. When a little girl is raped by her uncle and conceives a child, though God’s eternal law of free will permit the consequences, we cannot say it is what He wanted.

Again, even in that instance, the LDS know every precaution must be taken to save innocent life. But the life in the womb may not be the only innocent life in danger. Circumstances may require one to save the other. In that rare case, God will guide the decision. That is the LDS view.

Thanks for your follow up questions.
Click to expand...
The only evil involved when a child is conceived through rape, is the act of rape itself.

Once that is finished, and the rapist is no longer around, there is no evil.

So why should the baby be aborted? No matter how much counselling and guidance is given.

If a girl is raped by her uncle, and wouldn’t be able to cope with seeing that child every day, knowing it has been made through rape and incest, then she can adopt the baby out. There are plenty of people who would love an innocent baby.

The baby is not evil just because it has been conceived through violence, and a contaminated blood line.

I don’t understand how the Mormons can say abortion is ok after guidance and prayer and counselling in these circumstances. It is still murder.
 
It is doubly so when you consider that in Mormon doctrine, children are born innocent, without stain of original sin, and are celestial innocents until reaching the age of accountability. Coupled with the belief that the *only unforgivable sin *is the taking of an innocent life, there is no room for abortion within the strictures of mormon theology under any circumstances.

Yet, to play the moderate in politics and keep from alienating potential converts without completely abandoning their “conservative” position, they allow their members to think it is ok to abort children, despite the other, scriptural, teachings that it is the only way for them to lose their eternal bonds of endowment and sealing, as NDM puts it, so long as it is done with prayerful consideration…
 
It is proper to call God “the Creator” because He is the Creator. Joseph Smith only used “organized” to try to illustrate the process of “creation.”
Click to expand...
This no where approaches the teaching of the lds church. Perhaps you should have a talk with Tom Nosser, a TBM, who can set you out with the correct notion of “creation” from the LDS perspective, seing as he left the Catholic Church because this particular topic.

The LDS do not teach that matter is anything except eternal, and that God did not created, but organized it. This is no mere euphamism of Smith, it is the plain “truth” he taught. Creation Ex Nihilio is not an available theological “option” for a mormon. It is frankly deceitful to suggest that it is.

Further, Smith did not teach the pantheism you described, wherein all creation is “intelligence”, and further that all matter, such as atoms and quanta, are emanations of God’s intelligence. Contrarily, he taught that all spirit is matter, just more “refined”. He never made the connection between our eternal “intelligences” with our “matter” as you have. A personal interpretation, I beleive. Granted, there is room for you to create such a belief as that, but I am certain that such a schema would be rejected, officially, from the brethren, as being an alien one to that which they want to promulgate. He also demanded that all said intelligneces had no origin, that they were eternal precisely because they could not have been created! At best, God merely created the bodies our intelligences reside in, according to Smith’s teachings as found in the SW.

Apparently you have been too close to your catholic “freinds” while endorsing the historical policy of your religion to bend or even deny your doctrines in order to attract more converts.

If you truly want to answer honest questions about your faith, stop hiding the truth you claim to have and actually discuss the very real differences that exist instead of hiding them. Doing so only betrays your true intention to guide anyone you can out of their faith and into yours.

IF there was any truth you possess, you should be willing to proclaim it to the world, as Christ did command, yet you have, in short order, already denied clear teachings of your religion. I know you excuse this for a variety of reasons, as it is how you were taught to evangelize by your corporate leaders, who are all too happy to deny their faith when it becomes expedient to do so. Christ claimed to be the Truth, yet you proudly lie when operating in his name!

I pray you will wake up from your spiritual sleep, as I did, and as others here have done before and after, with the true Grace of the Holy Blessed Trinity. For it is in God; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; that Truth resides, not in the empty vanities of a long dead “prophet”.
 
So I think you can come to me and find out exactly what the LDS Church teaches.
Click to expand...
Heh! But didn’t you know; all your exaulted status while serving faithfully as a member is completely washed away because of your apostascy! You do not now know, nor ever did know, anything about the lds church! Even the verifiable facts, acknowledged quotations and documentation is inherently false, simply because it crosses your desk in its relaying… Ugh. Now I remember why I stopped coming to this section of the boards… when the mormons get to redefine everything, including the language of other religions, and anyone who disagrees with any jot or tittle is labled a “critic” and promptly ignored, regardless of the objective validity of their postion. Of course, as they cannot stand up to such critique, so naturally all who have such critical information are necessarily anathematized…

Still, it might be entertaining to actually see him respond substantively to the preisthood/apostasy question. Will he rely on a late dating? Will he rely simply on the protestant notion of moral preisthood? or is he going to follow the modern practice of asserting a specific order of preisthood that only apostles had, and could not relay to their successors (despite SW evidence that they could and did)… :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top