H
hosemonkey
Guest
Good post. Zerinus says that we have “lost the argument” against LDS. In fact, there is no argument FOR LDS. All I have heard from most mormons on these forums is “burning in the bosom”, “pray about it”, “listen to the (mormon) Holy Spirt”, and similar evasions and non-truths. No solid justification or reasoning for a whole bunch of non-Christian and non-Scriptural beliefs. Most of these beliefs springing from the fertile imagination of Joe Smith. It all hangs on the mormon belief that Joe Smith was a prophet. He WAS a prophet. A false prophet, one that Scripture warns us about.Kolob and spirit babies do not exist. This is the fanciful imagination of Joseph Smith at work and millions of people have been led into this deception. These beliefs deserve to be questioned. Period.
Referring to the Inquisition is just as much an attack on the Catholic Church as would be referring to priests as pedophiles.
It’s a cliche attack on Catholicism, not an intellectual argument.
I’m not “going after” his personal faith, I’m questioning tenets of his theology that are disturbing and incompatible with Christian teaching.
This expression “call you on the carpet” or “calling you out” (as you have used in the past) is Jerry Springer talk. What I’m referring to your public personal attacks on me. I would not characterize them as “calling one out”. If you felt that my exchanges with Zerinus were rude, I would have had much more respect for your opinion if you would have sent me a PM. Further, you have in no way illustrated how I have not used Catholic teaching. You simply have deemed me rude.
But take this Catholic apologetic work found in the Catholic Answers library:
“The Wacky World of Joseph Smith And the un-Christianity of Mormon Theology” By Fr. Brian Harrison
catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0305fea4.asp
Do you find this title to be rude? It’s written by a Catholic priest. What you perceive as rude, I perceive as honest.
You still haven’t clarified how I have gone against the teaching of the Church. Just a point to note, I don’t believe Mormons fall under the category of “separated brethren”, as they are not Christian. Certainly, they fall under the category of fellow man, but “separated brethren” refers specifically to Christians.
See here:
**Q: I read recently that the Catholic Church had rejected Mormon baptism, since their view of Christ and the Trinity is so unusual. But I have to ask: Are Mormons considered separated brothers and sisters? While their views are strange to say the least, they are still separated, and we should reach out to them. If we view them as something other than separated, doesn’t that exclude ecumenism? I know that many view them as a cult, but aren’t cult members separated as well? **
A: The reason Mormons are not considered separated brethren is not because they aren’t “separated” from the Church-they are-but they aren’t “brethren” in the sense required.
The phrase *separated brethren *refers to those who, though separated from full communion with the Catholic Church, have been justified through baptism and are thus brethren in Christ. The Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio) of Vatican II teaches that “all who have been justified by faith in baptism are members of Christ’s body, and have a right to be called Christian, and so are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.”
Because Mormonism is polytheistic and rejects the Trinity, Mormon baptism is not valid, and Mormons are not considered separated brethren. For the same reason, outreach to them, while certainly a good thing, is not ecumenism, though it can include dialogue and social cooperation as well as efforts to evangelize them.
catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0210qq.asp
Yes, I have. That’s correct.
![]()