RCC Decision Not to Recognize LDS Baptism!

[Rbt_Southwell]

Yeah, Paul, thanks.

It really puts the ranting and raving of Zerinus in its proper perspective.

BTW, do you remember that book entitled, "How the Irish Saved Civilization"?

Thomas Cahill is discussing Manicheism (page 49) and St Augustine (today is his Feast Day!):

"But it * couldn’t keep up with Augustine’s fearlessly inquiring mind. Like Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormonism, it was full of assertions, but could yield no intellectual system to nourish a great intellect."

This sort of puts Zerinus’ wandering logic and goofy jumps of credibility in perspective, don’t you think??

Robert*

 

[zerinus]

Except that every missionary effort starts out with the declaration that our creed is an “abomination” and all of us who profess it are “corrupt”. Except that the LDS Church has always taught that the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon and that the protestant communities are our harlot daughters. Except that TBMs like you call us “apostates” (a misuse of the term, btw).

Other than that, no problem!

Abomination: a filthy, shameful, or detestable action, condition, habit, etc.

Corrupt: 1. guilty of dishonest practices, as bribery; lacking integrity; crooked: a corrupt judge.
2. debased in character; depraved; perverted; wicked; evil

What part of our creed is filthy, shameful and detestable, Z? And what about it makes us debased, depraved, perverted and wicked?

That is false. That does not represent the official position of the LDS Church.

The Catholic Church is the only one that meets the Book of Mormon’s description of The Great and Abominable Church.

That is not true either. You do not understand the Book of Mormon correctly, or deliberately misrepresenting it (more likely the latter).

Then there are the quotes from Mormon leaders:

Those quotes belong to ages past, are quoted out of context, and do not represent the official stand of the Church with regard to the Catholic or any other church.

I see this as a deliberate act of deception, disinformation, and misrepresentation by someone who is, after all, an apostate from the LDS Church.

zerinus

 

[BartBurk]

That is false. That does not represent the official position of the LDS Church.

That is not true either. You do not understand the Book of Mormon correctly, or deliberately misrepresenting it (more likely the latter).

Those quotes belong to ages past, are quoted out of context, and do not represent the official stand of the Church with regard to the Catholic or any other church.

I see this as a deliberate act of deception, disinformation, and misrepresentation by someone who is, after all, an apostate from the LDS Church.

zerinus

Mormons are good at not having official positions. But every Mormon I know thought the Catholic Church was the whore of Babylon. As missionaries we always referred to the Catholic Church that way among ourselves.

 

[zerinus]

Mormons are good at not having official positions. But every Mormon I know thought the Catholic Church was the whore of Babylon. As missionaries we always referred to the Catholic Church that way among ourselves.

Well, you were wrong. That is not the position of the LDS Church.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

jmcrae;2646591:

If so (and I have not encountered such threads in my wanderings) why not reply to those threads, instead of starting up a new one of your own that the participants in these other alleged threads might not even see?

Those threads occured a while ago. I started this thread in order to draw attention to my comprehensive reply to all the issues and questions that had previously been raised.

zerinus

Okay, I have found a couple of previous threads where this subject was brought up (by Catholic posters no by LDS), and discussed. The following posts are from a thread called “Q for Mormons”:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2117757&postcount=157
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2118997&postcount=164
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2120495&postcount=170
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2120764&postcount=172

And the following posts are from a thread called “any former mormons out there?”:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1818520&postcount=515
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1818722&postcount=518
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1818941&postcount=520
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1819505&postcount=523

Are you now convinced?

zerinus

 

[BartBurk]

Well, you were wrong. That is not the position of the LDS Church.

zerinus

Does the Mormon Church even have any official positions about anything?

 

[zerinus]

Does the Mormon Church even have any official positions about anything?

Yes, the LDS position is that the fundamental teachings, doctrines, and beliefs of the LDS Church is that which is taught in the scriptural canon of the Chruch, meaning the standard works. That is the “official” doctrine of the Church.

zerinus

 

[BartBurk]

Yes, the LDS position is that the fundamental teachings, doctrines, and beliefs of the LDS Church is that which is taught in the scriptural canon of the Chruch, meaning the standard works. That is the “official” doctrine of the Church.

zerinus

No wonder there are so many Mormon spin-offs. That is the same problem with Protestantism. It is the Mormon version of sola scriptura because the buck doesn’t stop anywhere. Anybody can interpret the Mormon scriptures as they wish and then start up a new group. You are the only Mormon I know that insists on sola scriptura – everyone else includes the interpretation of the modern LDS prophet which of course may have been different from Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and any other former “prophet”. It’s no wonder Mormons can now use birth control and don’t have a position on embryonic stem cell destruction.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

I am not “demanding” anything. Just as you or your church have the right to make any decision they like, and publish it on their website with or without an explanation; I too reserve the right to look at that decision, examine it in the light of its historical context, and the evidences and the circumstances surrounding it, and come to a conclusion about it according to my understanding case, and publish it in my Blog if I want to! That is what I have done! Do you have any problem with that?

zerinus

It can be problematic.

If someone asserts that things like “the historical context, evidence and circumstances surrounding it” are the paramount considerations, as they would be in a political pronouncement, then one misinterprets, misrepresents, and sometimes abuses the Church. The pronouncements are first and foremost declarations of truth in faith and morals. One may certainly accept or reject the declarations, but to treat them as other than what they are is another matter.

The Church is neither a democracy nor a political entity.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[jmcrae]

The Church is neither a democracy nor a political entity.

Furthermore, like any other private organization, it is free to set its own requirements for membership, so long as those requirements are reasonably attainable by anyone with sufficient desire to become a member.

It is not unreasonable to ask that those converting from religions without valid baptisms to be baptized as part of their entry into the Church. It is a completely painless procedure.

Further, as Rebecca mentioned earlier in the thread, the very act of attending RCIA classes would cause one’s Mormon baptism to cease to exist, so, in any case, the person would need to be baptized again - either in the Catholic Church to become a member in full communion with the Catholic Church, or in the Mormon Church, if, after completing RCIA, he decided that he would rather return to the practice of the Mormon religion.

So, to repeat what Rebecca said, “What’s the big deal, anyway?”

 

[zerinus]

No wonder there are so many Mormon spin-offs. That is the same problem with Protestantism. It is the Mormon version of sola scriptura because the buck doesn’t stop anywhere. Anybody can interpret the Mormon scriptures as they wish and then start up a new group. You are the only Mormon I know that insists on sola scriptura – everyone else includes the interpretation of the modern LDS prophet which of course may have been different from Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and any other former “prophet”. It’s no wonder Mormons can now use birth control and don’t have a position on embryonic stem cell destruction.

I am afraid you don’t know what you are talking about. I have already discussed this subject at length in my Blog. You can read it here.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

It can be problematic.

If someone asserts that things like “the historical context, evidence and circumstances surrounding it” are the paramount considerations, as they would be in a political pronouncement, then one misinterprets, misrepresents, and sometimes abuses the Church. The pronouncements are first and foremost declarations of truth in faith and morals. One may certainly accept or reject the declarations, but to treat them as other than what they are is another matter.

The Church is neither a democracy nor a political entity.

Blessings,

Gerry

I am not a member of your church, and I don’t feel bound by its internal rules (or what you consider to be its rules, probably incorrectly). I reserve the right to have an opinion about what it says or does, especially when it relates to my own Church; and to express that opinion as and when I see fit.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Furthermore, like any other private organization, it is free to set its own requirements for membership, so long as those requirements are reasonably attainable by anyone with sufficient desire to become a member.

It is not unreasonable to ask that those converting from religions without valid baptisms to be baptized as part of their entry into the Church. It is a completely painless procedure.

Further, as Rebecca mentioned earlier in the thread, the very act of attending RCIA classes would cause one’s Mormon baptism to cease to exist, so, in any case, the person would need to be baptized again - either in the Catholic Church to become a member in full communion with the Catholic Church, or in the Mormon Church, if, after completing RCIA, he decided that he would rather return to the practice of the Mormon religion.

So, to repeat what Rebecca said, “What’s the big deal, anyway?”

Your posts are so absurd, ridiculous, and nonsensical that they do not merit a response from me.

zerinus

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

I am not a member of your church, and I don’t feel bound by its internal rules (or what you consider to be its rules, probably incorrectly). I reserve the right to have an opinion about what it says or does, especially when it relates to my own Church; and to express that opinion as and when I see fit.

zerinus

Oh my. Now you presume to instruct Catholics on the “rules” of their faith. Is there no end to it?

You may certainly have an opinion on it. But that opinion is less than an honest or upright one when it misrepresents what is being presented.

As for your presenation, I’m beginning to wonder about whether or not you are having some difficulties with your own beliefs. I’m seeing bahaviour consistent with picking fights on an issue to cover up one’s own doubts concerning it. There’s too much happening here to be easily explained by inate rudeness.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

Your posts are so absurd, ridiculous, and nonsensical that they do not merit a response from me.

zerinus

You could have replied in just one word. Touche!

Of course, the post you reference was none of the things you claim, but it certainly seems to have struck home.

Just what doubts are troubling you, anyway?

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[BartBurk]

You could have replied in just one word. Touche!

Of course, the post you reference was none of the things you claim, but it certainly seems to have struck home.

Just what doubts are troubling you, anyway?

Blessings,

Gerry

Well, for one thing, an LDS person will not be excommunicated for simply attending another church or even going to an RCIA class. When I was baptized Catholic, a person couldn’t even get excommunicated for joining another church. That was just recently changed so that now members who join other churches can be excommunicated.

 

[Sixtus]

You have absolutely no evidence for that whatsoever. You are at liberty to disbelieve in the Book of Mormon; just as people are at liberty to disbelieve in the Bible (and many do). But you can no more prove that the Book of Mormon is a fabrication, than you can prove that the stories in the Bible are a fabrication.
]

It seems then that if the Book of Mormon is true, then the Holy Spirit was a bit slow in coming to ‘guide us into all truth’ Jn 16:13

Amazing in fact that He kept silent for 1900-years!!

The description given by Luke in Acts of the Church does not hold much in comparison with LDS. That is just my humble obvservation.

Nobody cares whether the Catholic Church accepts LDS baptism or not.

I am glad you take such lighthearted view. Evidently no-body cares what Christ taught either.

I am amazed however how the Catholic Church has not condemned anyone to hell but the LDS condemns all Catholics and has been doing so for the past 30-years to my certain knowledge. By whose authority does LDS make this proclamation? I suggest the LDS is not authorised to make such a statement

What is of interest to us (at least academically) are the reasons

why they have done so (and done so now). The question is why the Catholic Church, which made that decision, chose not to provide an official explanation for their decision, just to stop everyone from guessing? Could it be that they did not really have a viable explanation; and they chose to keep quite about it rather than offer an explanation which they could not afterwards defend?

His Holiness Pope Benedict said that ‘truth is not a majority decision’. I think that answers your question. It may not be the answer you are looking for but it does give considerable insight.

But ultimately, nobody cares that they have made that decision, least of all the LDS Church.

zerinus

I would suggest that less than 1% who do not care, is hardly a representative sample. What of the remainder: 98% DO care!

I would hardly describe 98% of a given population as 'no-body

Heretics come and heretics go but the Catholic Church goes on until the end of time

 

[BartBurk]

It seems then that if the Book of Mormon is true, then the Holy Spirit was a bit slow in coming to ‘guide us into all truth’ Jn 16:13

Amazing in fact that He kept silent for 1900-years!!

The description given by Luke in Acts of the Church does not hold much in comparison with LDS. That is just my humble obvservation.

I am glad you take such lighthearted view. Evidently no-body cares what Christ taught either.

I am amazed however how the Catholic Church has not condemned anyone to hell but the LDS condemns all Catholics and has been doing so for the past 30-years to my certain knowledge. By whose authority does LDS make this proclamation? I suggest the LDS is not authorised to make such a statement

His Holiness Pope Benedict said that ‘truth is not a majority decision’. I think that answers your question. It may not be the answer you are looking for but it does give considerable insight.

I would suggest that less than 1% who do not care, is hardly a representative sample. What of the remainder: 98% DO care!

I would hardly describe 98% of a given population as 'no-body

Heretics come and heretics go but the Catholic Church goes on until the end of time

The LDS Church doesn’t condemn anyone to hell either. It doesn’t even condemn apostates like me to hell. LDS do baptisms for the dead for those who have not received LDS baptisms (like most Catholics) in the hopes they will accept the gospel in the next world and be saved in what they call the Celestial Kingdom. The Mormon Church is actually very charitable in its view of salvation regarding non-Mormons. It simply declares itself the one true church, just like the Catholic Church declares itself to be the one true church. Unlike many Evangelical Protestants however, neither the Catholic or Mormon Church condemns non-members to hell. Evangelical Protestants are the ones who claim that unless you believe exactly as they believe about how you accept Jesus that you’re going to hell.

 

[BartBurk]

The LDS Church doesn’t condemn anyone to hell either. It doesn’t even condemn apostates like me to hell. LDS do baptisms for the dead for those who have not received LDS baptisms (like most Catholics) in the hopes they will accept the gospel in the next world and be saved in what they call the Celestial Kingdom. The Mormon Church is actually very charitable in its view of salvation regarding non-Mormons. It simply declares itself the one true church, just like the Catholic Church declares itself to be the one true church. Unlike many Evangelical Protestants however, neither the Catholic or Mormon Church condemns non-members to hell. Evangelical Protestants are the ones who claim that unless you believe exactly as they believe about how you accept Jesus that you’re going to hell.

To continue with my last post, the LDS Church actually takes a very hopeful view of salvation. The only people who wind up in outer darkness are those who are named “sons of perdition.” Joseph Smith said the following about the “sons of perdition”:

All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it; and from that time he begins to be an enemy. This is the case with many apostates of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In other words to become a son of perdition you have to have a perfect knowledge of God and then reject Him completely. I don’t imagine there are very many people in the world who have such a perfect knowledge of God. The LDS religion, like the Catholic religion, is a very hopeful religion when it comes to the future of mankind. I think we would find that LDS and Catholics have more in common than some of us are willing to admit. If the LDS Church ever finally accepts the Trinity (and I don’t believe they are far from that right now) then we will even have more in common. The Book of Mormon and the early sections of the Doctrine and Covenants seem very Trinitarian to me. They will never have the true church because they don’t have the authority from God they claim to have, but in many ways I still think Mormonism is closer to the truth than many of our Protestant friends.

 

[zerinus]

You may certainly have an opinion on it. But that opinion is less than an honest or upright one when it misrepresents what is being presented.

The charge of dishonesty rebounds on you unless you are prepared to say how my “opinion” misrepresents “what is being represented”.

zerinus