The Church in the Americas and the Great Apostasy

[Palaiologos]

Hi, KathleenGee,

Here is a logical explanation about the willingness of Ignatius to suffer martyrdom rather than deny his faith that Christ had come “in the flesh”, written by Richard Lloyd Anderson in an article I had cited earlier in this thread, which is found here:

lds.org/ensign/1976/08/clement-ignatius-and-polycarp-three-bishops-between-the-apostles-and-apostasy?lang=eng&query=great+apostasy+New+World

Quote:
John’s Revelation had been given to the same churches that Iganatius wrote to, and its early chapters give only two choices: faithful martyrdom or unfaithful apostasy. He does not even discuss the possibility that the faithful saints will perpetuate the church on earth. If that had been a real option, then Ignatius should have hoped for continued life to extend Christianity further. Instead, he thought that his best choice was death for Christ, which exactly fits the apostolic prophecies.

No offense but that argument is a joke. The author is either unfamiliar with Ignatius’ epistles and what they contain or he is being willfully deceitful. Nothing in Ignatius’ epistles suggest that he was choosing martyrdom because he believed that the church was coming to an end. In contrast he repeatedly counseled the saints to remain loyal to their bishops and clergy, who stand in the place of the Father, Jesus, and the apostles. The church was the body of Christ that could not be destroyed. Ignatius was a willing martyr because he loved Jesus and understood that Jesus willingly died for us. He was showing Jesus that he was happy to do the same. And he was traditionally said to be a very old man who had faithfully served Jesus and the Church as bishop of Antioch for many years. He understood that his death would not hurt the mission of the Church but rather his witness would strengthen it. “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church”. And that is exactly what happened. His joyful embrace of martyrdom inspired thousands of fellow Christians down through the centuries to remain steadfast in their confession of faith in spite of persecutions, torture, and death. Ignatius arguably achieved more by his death than he did during his life.

If you haven’t read the epistles of Ignatius (circa 107 AD) I would recommend that you spend some time carefully studying them. They give invaluable insight into the church that emerged from the labors of the apostles: its organization, beliefs, sense of connection between local churches, and willingness to suffer rather than compromise the faith that had been handed on to them.

 

[KathleenGee]

What I am witnessing now from new Mormons coming on here is using Catholic teachings to prove their points, and then when we give them the correct perspective, they ignore it.

I find it very devious. Sorry, I do not intend to be uncharitable, but there is a dishonesty in misinterpreting or deliberately in using our Catholic teachings, clearly written, to make them into something else.

I find it particularly offensive to then take ancient early Church fathers or apologists and to use their writings in contradiction to what they intended. I posted in length on the background of the Council of Nicea, and how St. Athanasius, who was exiled 5 times from his lawful episcopacy, held his ground in the face of Arianism that began teaching Christ had a beginning and an end.

Such teaching of Christ, having a beginning and an end, being separate from the Father, would have eventually led to polytheism, as we see in Mormonism or a return to paganism. These facts were ignored.

There is something to say about Mormon thought/speak…The authorities in the Catholic Church, in this time of improved relations by the Mormons, should also address Mormon deliberate misuse of our teachings. The Church has never taught man had no free intellect or will, for example, or that infants go to hell.

It is Mormonism that began this inimical and condemning stance against our faith, our priesthood, and our sacraments, as well as our communion of saints as an abomination.

The Vatican, being in Rome, Italy, is not that aware to the extent Americans are who know the footprints of Mormonism and its history of thought and practice, except it was gaining illicit gains of our sacramental records for baptisms of our dead.

I found it particularly offensive when a Mormon writer said they had come upon ‘a treasure trove’ of sacramental records of priests and nuns going back one thousand years, to baptism them in their Mormon temples. When the Vatican found out and told them they could no longer do that, they were offended. The Vatican said not having access to our sacred records was not intended to set back relations.

Young Mormons would do well first to go back and have deep study of what their leaders taught and did going back to the beginning of Mormonism.

 

[Holly3278]

I recommend that you read this article about the “Great Apostasy”. In short, there was no such thing.

catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9203fea.asp

 

[SteveVH]

That’s odd, because what I remember of Bruce R. McConkie are the words of the hymn that he wrote.

hymn written by Bruce R McConkie:

I’ll point out also that Brother McConkie read his poem again over the pulpit in 2003, as his final public testimony. In the very last sermon that he delivered in mortality, Bruce R. McConkie stated that he worshiped Jesus Christ with all his might.

I hope that at the end of my life that I’ll still be able to say the same.

Well, it may be odd, but that is his quote. Sounds like he changed his mind, which is not unusual in the LDS faith, from what I’ve seen. He also explained what he meant when using the word “worship”. This is another trait commom to LDS; using the same words but meaning something completely different.

 

[ParkerD]

…
If you haven’t read the epistles of Ignatius (circa 107 AD) I would recommend that you spend some time carefully studying them. They give invaluable insight into the church that emerged from the labors of the apostles: its organization, beliefs, sense of connection between local churches, and willingness to suffer rather than compromise the faith that had been handed on to them.

Palaiologos,

I have read several of Ignatius’ writings as translated into English, and I don’t find that what Richard Anderson wrote (which quotes from him since he had studied his writings) is at odds, but I would not expect Catholics to agree with how he perceived the approach Ignatius expresses. He certainly upheld that the saints should follow the bishops who had been ordained legitimately, but he also showed that by being willing to die, he was unlike John who was trying to uphold the saints by remaining alive.

Peace to you–we can have differences and be just fine.

 

[SteveVH]

Palaiologos,

I have read several of Ignatius’ writings as translated into English, and I don’t find that what Richard Anderson wrote (which quotes from him since he had studied his writings) is at odds, but I would not expect Catholics to agree with how he perceived the approach Ignatius expresses. He certainly upheld that the saints should follow the bishops who had been ordained legitimately, but he also showed that by being willing to die, he was unlike John who was trying to uphold the saints by remaining alive.

Peace to you–we can have differences and be just fine.

He died because he would not deny his faith, not because he was just throwing up his hands. That is the definition of a martyr. That statement of faith speaks louder than anything he could have subsequently said. The same is true for all martyrs. They willingly die rather than compromise the truth of God. What should Ignatius have done in order to stay alive?

***“Ignatius answered, You are in error when you call the dæmons of the nations gods. For there is but one God, who made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that are in them; and one Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, whose kingdom may I enjoy. Trajan said, Do you mean Him who was crucified under Pontius Pilate? Ignatius replied, I mean Him who crucified my sin, with him who was the inventor of it, and who has condemned [and cast down] all the deceit and malice of the devil under the feet of those who carry Him in their heart. Trajan said, Do you then carry within you Him that was crucified? Ignatius replied, Truly so; for it is written, ‘I will dwell in them, and walk in them.’ 2 Corinthians 6:16 Then Trajan pronounced sentence as follows: We command that Ignatius, who affirms that he carries about within him Him that was crucified, be bound by soldiers, and carried to the great [city] Rome, there to be devoured by the beasts, for the gratification of the people. When the holy martyr heard this sentence, he cried out with joy, I thank you, O Lord, that You have vouchsafed to honour me with a perfect love towards You, and have made me to be bound with iron chains, like Your Apostle Paul. Having spoken thus, he then, with delight, clasped the chains about him; and when he had first prayed for the Church, and commended it with tears to the Lord, he was hurried away by the savage cruelty of the soldiers, like a distinguished ram the leader of a goodly flock, that he might be carried to Rome, there to furnish food to the bloodthirsty beasts.”
*** (From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.)

 

[KathleenGee]

Steve,

Excellent post.

Mormons need to focus on what we are actually teaching, not reading into it and making it different than it is.

 

[Palaiologos]

Palaiologos,

I have read several of Ignatius’ writings as translated into English, and I don’t find that what Richard Anderson wrote (which quotes from him since he had studied his writings) is at odds, but I would not expect Catholics to agree with how he perceived the approach Ignatius expresses. He certainly upheld that the saints should follow the bishops who had been ordained legitimately, but he also showed that by being willing to die, he was unlike John who was trying to uphold the saints by remaining alive.

Peace to you–we can have differences and be just fine.

If you are open to changing your mind on Ignatius we could discuss this in more detail. I believe that it can be shown that he did not believe that the church was ending or sliding into apostasy, that he gloried in his sentence of execution out of love for Jesus, and that his martyrdom was a boon not a setback for the church. But from reading your other posts I suppose that it would just be a waste of time. I will however try to defend the catholic faith against heretical teachings and misleading uses of the church fathers (who were catholic christians after all). The simple truth about Jesus’ church is there in front of you if you are willing to see it. I harbor no ill will towards individual mormons; my wife and parents are still firm believers in the mormon faith. I know how difficult and costly it can be to leave the lds church.

My motivations in posting on this forum parallel those of St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century (from ‘Against Heresies’):

“to reclaim the wanderers and convert them to the Church of God, to confirm at the same time the minds of the neophytes, that they may preserve steadfast in the faith which they have received, guarded by the Church in its integrity, in order that they be in no way perverted by those who endeavor to teach them false doctrines and lead them away from the truth.”

 

[KathleenGee]

Pela…

God bless you and keep you…You are a true witness of faith. There is a group of which I am a member, and we pray for our Mormon people that the veil will be removed and they can come to fullness of faith, and seek the actual teachings of our church.

 

[CopticChristian]

If you are open to changing your mind on Ignatius we could discuss this in more detail. I believe that it can be shown that he did not believe that the church was ending or sliding into apostasy, that he gloried in his sentence of execution out of love for Jesus, and that his martyrdom was a boon not a setback for the church. But from reading your other posts I suppose that it would just be a waste of time. I will however try to defend the catholic faith against heretical teachings and misleading uses of the church fathers (who were catholic christians after all). The simple truth about Jesus’ church is there in front of you if you are willing to see it. I harbor no ill will towards individual mormons; my wife and parents are still firm believers in the mormon faith. I know how difficult and costly it can be to leave the lds church.

My motivations in posting on this forum parallel those of St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century (from ‘Against Heresies’):

“to reclaim the wanderers and convert them to the Church of God, to confirm at the same time the minds of the neophytes, that they may preserve steadfast in the faith which they have received, guarded by the Church in its integrity, in order that they be in no way perverted by those who endeavor to teach them false doctrines and lead them away from the truth.”

Paliologos,

Thank you for your interest and for the Holy Spirit leading you and your consent to share.

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,

Excellent post.

Mormons need to focus on what we are actually teaching, not reading into it and making it different than it is.

I’m not sure how Mormons actually view martyrdom, as they believe that Joseph Smith became a martyr as he was killed shooting his way out of prison. He was certainly not rejoicing in being given the opportunity to give it all for God. Compare this to Ignatius who clasped his own chains about him after first praying for the Church. Joseph was on the run in order to save his own life, rather than giving his life for his faith.

 

[KathleenGee]

Again, I am remaining with the understanding the Mormons do not follow the same Christ…someone as of yet they have not considered to die for.

The emphasis seems to be more on self and one’s family progressing to become gods…

 

[ParkerD]

Again, I am remaining with the understanding the Mormons do not follow the same Christ…someone as of yet they have not considered to die for.

The emphasis seems to be more on self and one’s family progressing to become gods…

Kathleen,

If you’re saying that Christ taught “die for me” and therefore “Mormons don’t follow the same Christ”, then I agree because Latter-day Saints have far more emphasis on “living for Christ”, on “repenting through the atonement of Christ” which means changing and becoming more loving disciples of Him every day of their lives, and on being strong on self-defense and on a unified group defense such as is shown by the group led by Captain Moroni in the Book of Mormon.

They believed in Christ and showed great love for Him, but also knew of the need to be defensively prepared and that this was part of “living for Christ” and “living with the resolve to protect themselves and their families” against the encroachment of any enemies who would seek to destroy their freedom, whether by physical means or spiritual means for that destruction of freedom to have peace and to follow Christ within their families.

 

[banarick]

:whackadoo: The First Apostasy. JN:6:66 When Jesus taught you must eat is flesh and drink his blood . The Eucharist. Catholics believe in the Eucharist

JN 6 : 66 “After this, many of his disciples went away and accompanied him no more”

See, an apostasy in the first century. But Mormons do not believe in the literal body and blood of Jesus. They apostacize before they even begin. :whackadoo::whackadoo::whackadoo:

 

[Telstar]

Kathleen,

If you’re saying that Christ taught “die for me” and therefore “Mormons don’t follow the same Christ”, then I agree because Latter-day Saints have far more emphasis on “living for Christ”, on “repenting through the atonement of Christ” which means changing and becoming more loving disciples of Him every day of their lives, and on being strong on self-defense and on a unified group defense such as is shown by the group led by Captain Moroni in the Book of Mormon.

They believed in Christ and showed great love for Him, but also knew of the need to be defensively prepared and that this was part of “living for Christ” and “living with the resolve to protect themselves and their families” against the encroachment of any enemies who would seek to destroy their freedom, whether by physical means or spiritual means for that destruction of freedom to have peace and to follow Christ within their families.

Hello Parker,

Can you show me one Bible passage (not from the BoM, etc.) that shows Jesus clearly telling His followers to prepare for defense against our physical enemies, let alone to defend our personal freedom from anyone that would take it from us? I tried and failed, but maybe you have a particular verse that you believe could verify this belief.

Thanks

 

[KathleenGee]

I mean to say that in Mormonism Christ is not enough to die for.

This can also be taken in context of American society, where we have freedom of religion, and no one here is put to death because they are Christian…

So is it right to say the Mormon religion has not been tested from its beginning with martyrdom as was the first 300 years of Christianity and beyond?

Millions of Christians have died more than any other time during the 20th century…but how many Mormons have died for Christ, in particular with their type of record system?

It is Jesus Christ Who is the foundation of the carnate world…He says Whoever denies me is not worthy of Me…Jesus said we be in the world, but not of it. His kingdom is within our hearts and souls. The more we enter into Christ, the more we enter into His kingdom already present.

We receive Confirmation to seal us in Jesus Christ…

Confirmation in Christ is the only sealing we receive.

 

[ParkerD]

Hello Parker,

Can you show me one Bible passage (not from the BoM, etc.) that shows Jesus clearly telling His followers to prepare for defense against our physical enemies, let alone to defend our personal freedom from anyone that would take it from us? I tried and failed, but maybe you have a particular verse that you believe could verify this belief.

Thanks

Telstar,

Good question, and probably you won’t agree with what I see as the answer.

First, looking in Matthew 25 and Matthew 24 one finds that being “ready” and being “wise” include the idea of being prepared in advance, and looking for “signs of the times” and being what one could call “wise stewards”. Matthew 24 also talks about fleeing into the mountains, which would mean that particular group of people weren’t expected to let themselves be killed.

Second, the Savior didn’t override the Old Testament in entirety, and when He taught to love your enemies that didn’t necessarily mean to let them do whatever they want to do to your family or to your freedom while you don’t resist. It means “love them” but doesn’t mean “don’t defend yourself”.

Third, the Savior was pointing toward the Millenium in His teachings, and toward a Millenial society where there will be peace and where freedom will indeed be established, and that will come as both a condition of the hearts and as a condition of physical well-being and security. Isaiah prophesied about this, and also about a time before the Millenium when there would be a “refuge from the storm” through places of safety.

Fourth, the Savior was also pointing to the coming time when His followers would be able to receive guidance through the Holy Spirit for particular circumstances, so it would seem to me that rather than give teachings related to what to do when an enemy is striking one’s children and family and freedom, that the answer would be to seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit specifically for that situation, to preserve the feeling in one’s heart of not seeking revenge and of “loving one’s enemies” but yet protecting one’s freedom.

 

[The_GreyPilgrim]

The historical premises that Mormonism is based are so rediculous it hardly deserves a response. The only reason why it survives is because of the sad lack of historical reference in this culture.

1. The Jews were not even good or dedicated mariners, much less would they EVER voluntarily leave their ancestral region. Or else someone would have found evidence of “Jewish ships” sunk off of American coasts.
2. The idiginous tribes of the Americas when dicovered by the European explorers had NO “BOOK OF MORMON”, no Christain symbols, they did not speak any language even resembling those of the ancient near-east. It is the height of absurdity to assume that they were the decendents of Jewish sea-faring immigrants to the Americas from the first century.

Mormonism to me is on par with Scientology as far as religions go. I know that there are good people that are Mormons, I love them with a true Christian love. But they have been sold a warehouse full of snake oil. And this “great apostasy” is part of it. They must believe it because without it the rest barely, if at all, can stand.

 

[SteveVH]

Kathleen,

If you’re saying that Christ taught “die for me” and therefore “Mormons don’t follow the same Christ”, then I agree because Latter-day Saints have far more emphasis on “living for Christ”, on “repenting through the atonement of Christ” which means changing and becoming more loving disciples of Him every day of their lives, and on being strong on self-defense and on a unified group defense such as is shown by the group led by Captain Moroni in the Book of Mormon.

They believed in Christ and showed great love for Him, but also knew of the need to be defensively prepared and that this was part of “living for Christ” and “living with the resolve to protect themselves and their families” against the encroachment of any enemies who would seek to destroy their freedom, whether by physical means or spiritual means for that destruction of freedom to have peace and to follow Christ within their families.

If the origin of this conversation is martyrdom, I think it is veering off the path. As a Catholic I have been taught that we have a moral obligation to defend ourselves and those around us from an enemy who’s intention it is to take our lives. We are certainly not prohibited from joining the military and defending our country. So I have no disagreement with you, Parker, on that score. If someone broke into my house and was threatening my family I can guarantee you that he would be met with force, even deadly force if the situation called for it.

Martyrdom is a different thing altogether. It comes when one is faced with the “free will choice” of either loosing their life or denying the Christian faith. It is in that circumstance that we are called to give our lives rather than deny our faith in the one, true God. This is not the same as defending one’s self from those that would harm him for other reasons. It all boils down to whether or not you would deny God in order to save your own skin.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Telstar,

Good question, and probably you won’t agree with what I see as the answer.

First, looking in Matthew 25 and Matthew 24 one finds that being “ready” and being “wise” include the idea of being prepared in advance, and looking for “signs of the times” and being what one could call “wise stewards”. Matthew 24 also talks about fleeing into the mountains, which would mean that particular group of people weren’t expected to let themselves be killed.

Second, the Savior didn’t override the Old Testament in entirety, and when He taught to love your enemies that didn’t necessarily mean to let them do whatever they want to do to your family or to your freedom while you don’t resist. It means “love them” but doesn’t mean “don’t defend yourself”.

Third, the Savior was pointing toward the Millenium in His teachings, and toward a Millenial society where there will be peace and where freedom will indeed be established, and that will come as both a condition of the hearts and as a condition of physical well-being and security. Isaiah prophesied about this, and also about a time before the Millenium when there would be a “refuge from the storm” through places of safety.

Fourth, the Savior was also pointing to the coming time when His followers would be able to receive guidance through the Holy Spirit for particular circumstances, so it would seem to me that rather than give teachings related to what to do when an enemy is striking one’s children and family and freedom, that the answer would be to seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit specifically for that situation, to preserve the feeling in one’s heart of not seeking revenge and of “loving one’s enemies” but yet protecting one’s freedom.

Dear Parker
Go here And find Saint Justin Martyr for the rest of his story. in the quote below I would say that in this circumastance He is protecting his freedom. This is a great example of a Christian Martyr. As you see the other names on this page/ link
catholic.org/saints/martyr.php

think about their lives and what they might have been like. Read some of their stories. In your own opinion is the part of the Body of Christ? Where they baptized into Christ or not? Do you see them as being Catholic Christians and in Heaven?

“The Prefect Rusticus says: Approach and sacrifice, all of you, to the gods. Justin says: No one in his right mind gives up piety for impiety. The Prefect Rusticus says: If you do not obey, you will be tortured without mercy. Justin replies: That is our desire, to be tortured for Our Lord, Jesus Christ, and so to be saved, for that will give us salvation and firm confidence at the more terrible universal tribunal of Our Lord and Saviour. And all the martyrs said: Do as you wish; for we are Christians, and we do not sacrifice to idols. The Prefect Rusticus read the sentence: Those who do not wish to sacrifice to the gods and to obey the emperor will be scourged and beheaded according to the laws. The holy martyrs glorifying God betook themselves to the customary place, where they were beheaded and consummated their martyrdom confessing their Savior.”