What Should Catholics Call Mormons?

[Diaconia]

In terms of terminology, it’s hard to define a Christian in the general sense of the word.

Actually it’s not - the two requisite things are: Do you believe there are three Persons in one God (Trinity), and Do you believe Jesus is truly God and truly man (hypostatic union)?

If you can’t answer yes to both; you’re not a Christian.

Every Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant can; Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses can’t. Hence the whole invalid baptism reality.

As @dochawk and @Montrose and @blackforest have already pointed out - this is a change to trick ignorant bystanders into thinking they are Christians when they aren’t.

So . . . although I grew up in Utah, have countless Mormon friends, and a Mormon brother-in-law, I won’t be calling them anything other than Mormons or LDS.

Deacon Christopher

 

[MarkRome]

From now on, it prefers that people use the church’s full name, and when a shortened reference is needed, to just use “the Church” or “Church of Jesus Christ.”

Sure, we can accommodate that. Just make sure to include the quotation marks around the words “the Church”.

 

[BornInMarch]

Unless I’m misinterpreting it, it just sounds (here goes . . . ) arrogant and anything but neutral. I go to a church and they go to the church. It really is OK to say what kind of church you attend. Methodists, Lutherans, Catholics, etc. don’t seem to have any problem with it. I’m with you on the issue of avoiding rudeness, but their semantical demands seem over-the-top to me.

I think you are misinterpreting it, though I’m not sure what your point is. To be fair, at least you’re not insisting that insulting Mormons to their face somehow makes you holy.

My point is that the names of organizations should be neutral, descriptive, and specific. Calling Mormons “the Church” or “the Church of Jesus Christ” is too vague, but calling them “Heretics” or “Perverts/Perverters” isn’t neutral at all. I think calling them “Mormon” is probably fine because that name references a book that their faith considers holy and that’s unique to them, and I’d even go so far as to say “LDS” is fine because while a lot of Christian denominations have the concept of sainthood the Mormons are the only ones who use the phrase “Latter Day Saints”.

 

[Raxus]

Jesus of Nazareth is still a central figure in Mormon theology.

In name only. Doesn’t really count.

 

[Raxus]

I think you are misinterpreting it, though I’m not sure what your point is. To be fair, at least you’re not insisting that insulting Mormons to their face somehow makes you holy.

My family has suffered greatly at the collective hands of the Mormon church. I’m not about to pretend that their religion is anything but a money-drive farce; it has nothing to do with making myself look holy at their expense.

 

[Formon]

It’s not official doctrine but that is what I was taught all my life as a Mormon. The younger generation of Mormons try to distance themselves from this.

 

[Raxus]

I don’t know that I’d go this far. Money seems to be behind what I’ve seen.

 

[Formon]

Money is a big deal to Mormons. Unlike our priests who live almost at the poverty level, Mormon mission presidents and general authorities get paid very well. And when in comes to the seriousness of sins, there are only a few things that are guaranteed to get you excommunicated from the Mormon church. Murder, sex change, adultery if you’re in a high leadership position, and embezzlement of church funds.

 

[TK421]

@blackforest

In everyday informal discussion, we call things whatever people call it. If a Presbyterian or a Baptist goes to church, we just say that they go to church. We don’t specify what a church is canonically in the Catholic faith.

 

[TheLittleLady]

As I mentioned above, the people I know use LDS Latter Day Saints and Mormons all interchangably.

 

[redcatholic]

My area is more than 25 percent. But in business and government it seems much higher! Theology aside. I am thankful I live in a high Mormon area, they are great neighbors and so family oriented. Making the communities much better.

 

[Formon]

Mormons are like anyone else. Some are great neighbors. Some are awful neighbors. Some are nice and friendly. Some are mean and nasty. Most are just average like me.

 

[blackforest]

It really depends on the context.

“Which church do you attend?”
“The church.”
“Um, OK. Which church?”
"The church!"

I think you are misinterpreting it,

How do you figure? What do you think is the intent in requesting to be called the church?

To be fair, at least you’re not insisting that insulting Mormons to their face somehow makes you holy.

No, that would be the opposite of evangelism.

My point is that the names of organizations should be neutral, descriptive, and specific.

I think we agree. I just don’t think their semantical requests are any of those three things. I say Mormon and LDS freely, but their church hierarchy doesn’t want that anymore. As others have said, individual Mormons may not have a problem with it.

Making the communities much better.

This I agree with. Everything feels more kid-friendly and empathetic toward families with small children.

 

[Dsivanish]

How about Smithians? or Youngites?

 

[Formon]

After all, Smith is a God and he determines who gets to go to the highest kingdom, so they may as well worship him.

Oh, and don’t forget that he did a greater work for man than anyone else including Jesus Christ.

 

[gazelam]

Actually it’s not - the two requisite things are: Do you believe there are three Persons in one God (Trinity), and Do you believe Jesus is truly God and truly man (hypostatic union)?

If you can’t answer yes to both; you’re not a Christian.

Isn’t it somewhat odd to define who is Christian by one’s acceptance of two doctrines not found in the Bible?

 

[Diaconia]

Not at all, the universal accepted definition to this very day, from the very beginning.

Sacred Tradition predates the New Testament by decades.

I’ve explained this to you before; no amount of Mormon apologetics is going to convince any Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant authority of the false claim of the LDS church to Christianity.

Deacon Christopher

 

[Xarto]

Calling them Christians is a bit of a stretch but we can be Christian in our attitudes. My wife’s aunt is a Mormon and she has no issue with that name.

 

[BornInMarch]

blackforest:

How do you figure?

It seemed like you were under the impression that I wanted to use the terms the Mormon church recommended, even though I myself said they didn’t work.

Later on I tried telling someone that we shouldn’t call Mormons “pagans” or “heretics” because of how mean-spirited that would be. That was not me urging the use of terms like “the church” or “the church of Jesus Christ”, because I previously said those terms didn’t work.

No, that would be the opposite of evangelism.

That’s right. Pushing away non-Catholics may feel good in the moment to some but in the end it just makes the Holy Spirit’s work harder than it has to be.

 

[gazelam]

Not at all, the universal accepted definition to this very day, from the very beginning.

Sacred Tradition predates the New Testament by decades.

If you believe this to be the case you have no historical record to back this up.

RPC Hansen asks:
"Finally, what is this Christian midrash [i.e., tradition]? What are its contents? The Gnostic formulae of Ignatius? The angcl-Christology of Hermas? … or the economic Trinity of Irenaeus and of Tertullian? The modalistic monarchianism of Callistus and Zephyrinus? The graded Trinity of Origen? (R. P. C. Hanson, Tradition in the Early Church (London: SCM, 1962),244-45.

Saint John Henry Newman writes,
If we limit our view of the teaching of the Fathers by what they expressly state, St. Ignatius may be considered as a Patripassian, St. Justin arianizes. and St. Hippolytus is a Photinian … Tertullian is heterodox on the doctrine of our Lord’s divinity … Origen is. at the very least, suspected, and must be defended and explained rather than cited as a witness of orthodoxy; and Eusebius was a Semi-Arian. (Newman, Essay, 43)

Are Justin Martyr, Ignatius, and Hippolytus also not Christians? None of them professed the Doctrine of the Trinity.