To all Roman Catholics in exile

[HopkinsReb]

Have you seen that in real life though or only here?

Mostly here, but the Catholics I’m friends with are a weird, hyper-educated lot who study theology for fun, so my Catholic friend group isn’t really a good group from which to draw generalizations. I suppose the forum isn’t, either.

Here on the forums our audience is both unclear and unknown. It makes tailoring the message to the audience difficult, and I think many people assume the other posters are Catholic but they may not be.

In general this would make sense, but not in a thread in which OP explicitly states he’s not Catholic and is asking separated Catholics why they are separated.

 

[commenter]

True, and courtesy and respect should be shown for all denominations, and non Christian faiths.

 

[commenter]

There also seems to be a great deal of a sort of fideism among cradle Catholics. They have no need to be able to defend a position; they seem to think that asserting that it’s a teaching of the Church will somehow convince non-Catholics.

Ok, but fideists are represented on caf far out of proportion to their numbers, in 2019. Far more common now is the opposite extreme, in the general population.

 

[JohnStrachan]

I want to offer a sincere apology to all RC’s at CAF for my bad behaviour and uncharitable language. I’ve spent time in the penalty box and have had time to reflect. I am very sorry for having a offended you all and will do better.

Pray for me. I keep coming back to this place for a reason. While I feel immensely frustrated with the “Church” I still feel drawn to her. Deep down I miss my Catholic faith and long for reconciliation.

Pax

 

[TOmNossor]

TOmNossor:

I don’t remember that they try to explain the origins of the BOM

What did you think about the article in wikipedia : Origin of the Book of Mormon?
Origin of the Book of Mormon - Wikipedia
Origin of the Book of Mormon - Wikipedia

Hello,
I have followed numerous theories as to the non-supernatural origins of the Book of Mormon for many years.
The indisputable fact is that the BOM came through Joseph Smith to a few scribes over a fairly short period of time.

All non-supernatural, non-Joseph Smith explanation (Cowdery, Rigdon, …) require additional persons, conspiracies, and connections. There is no historical evidence for these additional persons and none of them ever claimed they had a part in such things despite most of the potential co-conspirators spending time estranged from Joseph Smith.

All natural sources for the BOM require the additional need for Joseph Smith or co-conspirators to have accessed them and used them somehow to produce the BOM.

There are many things about the BOM that place it outside the capabilities that I believe we can reasonably suggest Joseph Smith possessed.
There are many things about the BOM that place it outside the capabilities of 19th century Americans.

Concerning sources, I believe there is a dependence upon the King James Version Bible. The rest of the potential sources IMO are not likely to have been part of the production of the Book of Mormon. But, if all of them and many others were part of the production of the Book of Mormon, I do not think that would be sufficient to explain what we have.

So short answer, yes I have read much more about the origins of the Book of Mormon than exists in the wikipedia page, but I do not believe they remove the need for pointing to a supernatural source. As a theist, I reject an occasionally sited atheist premise that, “the least parsimonious explanation for ANYTHING is ‘God did it.’”

It IMO is harder to explain the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints without appealing to the supernatural than is it to explain the Catholic Church without appealing to the supernatural. I would find it very difficult to claim God was involved in the production of the Book of Mormon AND yet I should worship as a Catholic. This is the largest reason I do not put down the PROBLEMS with the CoJCoLDS and pick up the problems (and positives) with the Catholic Church.
Charity, TOm

 

[AlNg]

The rest of the potential sources IMO are not likely to have been part of the production of the Book of Mormon.

Have you seen the manuscript Studies of the Book of Mormon by B. H. Roberts indicating that View of the Hebrews was a structural foundation for the Book of Mormon? Or the work of David Persuitte? And there are parallels with other works such as The Wonders of nature,.
What is your opinion of the parallels between the BOM and:
View of the Hebrews
or The Wonders of Nature.
Also have you read the statement of the Smithsonian Institution denying any pre-Columbian contact between Old and New Worlds?
Thank you.

 

[TOmNossor]

Hello AINg,

Have you seen the manuscript Studies of the Book of Mormon by B. H. Roberts indicating that View of the Hebrews was a structural foundation for the Book of Mormon?

I am pretty sure your position here is too strong. As I understand, Robert’s claimed that IF Joseph Smith was the author of the Book of Mormon then “View of the Hebrews” was a possible structural foundation.

Today also, but especially for folks from decades ago, I am very skeptical of the idea that some person (such as B.H. Roberts) lost his faith in the Church and yet continued to lead and testify and ultimately deceive those around him. I find the possibility that a god-fearing man doing such a thing to be remote indeed.

Or the work of David Persuitte? And there are parallels with other works such as The Wonders of nature,.

What is your opinion of the parallels between the BOM and:

View of the Hebrews

or The Wonders of Nature.

I have not read David Persuitte’s work. I am familiar with it, but I have not personally read it. There are many more disconnects between the “View of the Hebrews” and the BOM than there are connections. “The Wonders of Nature” is an even less connected text.

As I mentioned in my previous post, for these text to be part of the production of the BOM, Joseph Smith must consume them, formulate the story of the BOM, then dictate it with his face in a hat. I consider that an extraordinary act. Until many decades after Joseph Smith was dead, folks who knew him (critic and believer) by in large claimed (at least before he claimed to be a prophetic leader in regular contact with God) he was a simpleton. Here is a good post on what genius is involved (and builds upon a non-LDS who sees the extraordinary genius).

Bruce Charlton's Notions: Was Joseph Smith a "religious genius"?

Also have you read the statement of the Smithsonian Institution denying any pre-Columbian contact between Old and New Worlds?

I am aware that the Smithsonian Institute about 20 years ago spoke against the Book of Mormon and pre-Columbian contact between the Old and New Worlds. Today, Dennis J. Stanford is the Director of the Paleoindian/Paleoecology Program at the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution and he is a diffusionist (one who believes in pre-Columbian contact).

Many years ago the Smithsonian stopped making their statements about the pre-Columbian contact partially in response to LDS scientists educating them. Here is more info if you would like:

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=964&amp

I am not trying to convince you that you must be a LDS. That being said, I hope you can acknowledge that I am aware of the things you asked about, and it is likely that I have thought a great deal about these things.

I do not believe there is a good non-supernatural explanation for the Book of Mormon. This does not mean that horses and rusting swords are not problems.

Charity, TOm

 

[Padres1969]

I left for a number of reasons. Disagreements with the RCC over some points of theology. Disagreements with social positions of the church on a number of issues. Frankly disgust with the abuse scandal and what I still see as half measures of the church in response. And lastly I tired of my own hypocrisy is calling myself Catholic but believing so little of what the Church had taught me over close to 20 years of Catholic schooling.

Initially I drifted spiritually through Deism and Agnosticism while looking at all religions. Ultimately more than a decade later I ended up landing with the Episcopal Church. And I’ve happily been a member ever since baptizing my firstborn with the TEC and now working on the same with my second born. No yearning to return to the RCC, though I still observe from a distance as there are still those in the RCC I think of fondly.

 

[NostalgicBaptist]

Why did you leave? Where did you go? Do you yearn to return? If so, what has to change (in your heart or in the life of the church) to make that possible?

I’m not quite sure who you’re referring to. Is it directed only toward professing Roman Catholics who have dropped out of attending Mass and participating in the life of the Church?

 

[Chuck65]

I left for a number of reasons. First when I was divorced I went to my parish priest and was turned away. He told me that I could attend mass, but he could not help me. Second the sex abuse crisis and how it was handled sickened me. I was abused as a child by a relative and I believe the church failed to protect those who were most important and most vulnerable. The final straw was that my mother’s parish priest robbed her blind. We suspected what was going on, but she refused to tell us what was happening. When we found out that she had given him approximately $400,000 dollars and she was basically destitute and that other elderly parishioners had also been fleeced the diocese refused to intervene. We told them upfront that we weren’t going to try to recover the money from them, we just wanted him stopped from repeating this again with new victims. They refused to discuss it in any way and moved him out of state. The monsignor who refused to take any action was then made my parish priest. I’m still Catholic, I just do not have a parish at the present time. Will I go back? Time will tell. I’d like to, but it will be difficult to move past all of this. My wife is Methodist and I have attended church with her, but I am not Methodist and will never be so.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

@Chuck65 That’s so terrible! I’m so sorry you and your mother went through that.

 

[Chuck65]

Sadly, my mother died in the middle of all of this. She realized on her deathbed that she had been lied to since the only ones who sat with her for weeks or even made an appearance were the children she had been convinced did not have her best interests at heart. None of her “true friends” appeared or even called to inquire.
Her children forgave her for her words and deeds. I hope it was enough for her to pass peacefully.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

That’s so awful. I’m so sorry.

 

[Londoner]

I was angry that the church did not accept any responsibility for clergy abuse of minors and that the RC church in Canada would not accept responsibility for abuse of first nations people.

You surely cannot be unaware that the Anglican Church of Canada shares fully in responsibility for the abuse of First Nations children.

For example: Stephen Bates, ‘Anglican church in Canada says it faces bankruptcy from child abuse claims’, The Guardian (3 June 2000)

You also cannot be unaware that the burden of reparations fell so heavily on one Anglican diocese, the Diocese of Cariboo, that it actually had to cease to exist: Michael Valpy, ‘Lawsuits spell end of tiny B.C. diocese’, The Globe and Mail (29 December 2001)

While I can understand your losing faith in the Catholic Church in Canada over the issue of its abuse of First Nations children and its responses to that abuse, it is puzzling that you are seemingly able to overlook the failings of the Anglican Church of Canada, which are no less serious.

 

[Neithan]

Also the United Church of Canada (Methodist and Presbyterian). The CBC tends to focus on the Catholic Church though.

The Oblates of Mary Immaculate, who ran some of the Indian Residential Schools, formally apologized in 1991. https://www.cccb.ca/site/images/stories/pdf/oblate_apology_english.pdf

In the spirit of reconciliation though, and given that these schools were running for over 100 years, sometimes with abhorrent abuse (and the entire policy was abusive), I don’t think the attitude of “We apologized already and we’re not all responsible” is really fair. It would be awesome if Pope Francis visited Canada and Aboriginal communities here.

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

Left for the Greek Orthodox Church because I mistakenly believed that in 1054 ad, the Catholic Church left Orthodoxy, not that the Orthodox Church got excommunicated for leaving Orthodoxy. God-Willing, our family will return officially to the Catholic Church in April this year after over 16 yrs. Please pray for us that we’ll all revert, my husband, me, our 2 adult daughters, our adult son, our teenage son and 7 yr old daughter.

Update: Today was the day! My 7 yr old became Catholic officially & my husband and I officially reverted via the question & answer format of the Creed during Mass.

To my surprise, my 14 yr old served at Mass by helping usher the communion line and with the tithe baskets AND my oldest adult daughter & adult son both received Communion - neither of those 3 are practicing Catholics (one has been contracepting and living with her atheist boyfriend for years now). God-Willing they received an abundance of God’s Grace today and it’ll germinate in their hearts & they’ll allow Him to guide them home to His Church sooner rather than later.

May God set all of our hearts on fire for Him and His Church!!!

 

[JohnStrachan]

You surely cannot be unaware that the Anglican Church of Canada shares fully in responsibility for the abuse of First Nations children.

Absolutely. But the Anglican Church has admitted it’s fault, sought reconciliation and paid reparations. First Nation’s communities admire the ACC for taking the lead in reconciliation and seeking to make amends on an ongoing basis.

The RC church in Canada… not so much.

 

[commenter]

Londoner:

You surely cannot be unaware that the Anglican Church of Canada shares fully in responsibility for the abuse of First Nations children.

Absolutely. But the Anglican Church has admitted it’s fault, sought reconciliation and paid reparations. First Nation’s communities admire the ACC for taking the lead in reconciliation and seeking to make amends on an ongoing basis.

The RC church in Canada… not so much.

To a large extent our perceptions of institutional efforts to reconciliation, and our information about who other populations “admire”, is a reflection of who the secular media “admire”; and who the media oppose.

 

[JohnStrachan]

To a large extent our perceptions of institutional efforts to reconciliation, and our information about who other populations “admire”, is a reflection of who the secular media “admire”; and who the media oppose.

It’s also evident by their actions. In Canada, the Aboriginal Settlement Commission required the ACC to pay $25,000,000 over five years. Collectively diocese’ and congregations set about to raise the money and/or allocate reserve funds to match the objective. It was achieved. The RC church was required to pay $54,000,000. The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishop’s initiated an effort to reach that target but could only muster $16,000,000 as the attached document indicates.

https://www.aptnnews.ca/national-news/ottawa-let-catholic-church-off-the-hook-for-millions-in-residential-school-compensation/

 

[billsannie]

Please forgive me if I sound ignorant. I’m not acquainted with this case, but if the Anglican Church has admitted their fault and tried to atone, don’t they deserve some credit? And that perhaps if the Roman Catholic Church has done nothing, they are not worthy of admiration, secular media or no.