Why all the Mormon Bashing?

[dianaiad]

I don’t agree. I know a lot of us who are former Mormons who have found a new Faith who simply are compelled to share what they have experienced. Then they’re hit with the “you are lying” from Mormons on boards such as these and it just doesn’t gel with their own experience. I left Mormonism of my own free will and happily. I was elated to let my family know what had happened. It turned badly, quickly.

I know a few ex-Mormons who would disagree that this is a hugely biased sample. Most of us who leave encounter a grieving process much like when we lose a loved one. It is similiar in experience to a divorce with all those icky feelings.

Wouldn’t know; I’m not divorced. Nor have I left my faith or my family. I have, however, met many ex-members of other religions who convert TO Mormonism, and I don’t find that sort of bitterness among them–even among those whose families ostracized them for converting to Mormonism. A great many do just that, y’know.

I also have to admit that the great majority of ex-mormons that I come into contact with are vocal opponents, and very, very few of them are interested in presenting their former faith with sympathy or accuracy. Understandable, given that ex-Mormons who DO simply get on with their lives and embrace their new faiths don’t show up on forums and threads like this one.

If that was their experience, who am I to call them a liar?

I see. Doesn’t the fact that the sort of thing done by angry ex-Catholics being very similar to the sort of thing done by angry ex-Mormons tell you something?

my own experience is very very close to the ones posted by other ex-Mormons here on this board.

Of course it doesn’t happen… not in church settings…

Wanna bet?

Try attending a fundamentalist/evangelical church and see what happens there, or…just go to a Christian bookstore.

but then again the same could be said about Mass. That would be an inappropriate place for any of us to talk about our former faiths while we are celebrating our new one. But don’t try to tell me that when you are all together you don’t discuss those things.

I won’t "try’ to tell you. I’ll outright tell you. Someone who tries to do this, because he or she is new and thinks it’s the ‘thing to do,’ will be told, very gently, not to go down that path.

Don’t try to tell me that in your own conversations that you don’t compare and roll eyes about the faiths you left. I have been there, heard that. It happens all the time. Just not at Fast and Testimony meetings.

Just like it doesn’t happen at Mass.

in Christ
Steph

No, Steph, it simply does not happen. Period. Or, if it happens, it happens once–and the speaker gets told to knock it off.

Steph, perform an experiment. Go to the nearest “Christian” bookstore and go look at their ‘cult’ section. You will find all sorts of anti (insert belief system here, including Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Catholicism) books there. That section (in Utah it’s called 'comparative religions," to be politically correct, but the section is just as big) will sometimes take up a third of the store.

Now go into a Mormon bookstore. Deseret, perhaps…or go online and look at the Deseret bookstore and see if you can find a single book that is addressing, much less attacking, any other religion.

The closest you will find is a small section of volumes that are rebuttals to publications written to attack us.

I think that pretty much says it all.

 

[Synneve]

But don’t try to tell me that when you are all together you don’t discuss those things. Don’t try to tell me that in your own conversations that you don’t compare and roll eyes about the faiths you left. I have been there, heard that. It happens all the time. Just not at Fast and Testimony meetings.

And not, it seems, anywhere around me. I simply haven’t heard such conversations. Ever.

And we don’t read books with titles like Forty Years a Vatican Slave or Behind the Veil of Methodism. And we don’t run ministries or newspapers or seminars or radio programs or cable shows or Sunday school classes or college courses attacking other faiths.

 

[tundramom]

Well… you won’t hear it in Mass. So C’mon and join us!

I heard it plenty in Utah…

Look at the General Conference two years ago. Elder Holland? Hear the laughter when he starts talking about the Trinity? IN the highest church setting you could be in in Mormonism other than the Temple…

It’s there. It’s just not admitted.

in Christ
Steph

 

[Synneve]

Look at the General Conference two years ago. Elder Holland? Hear the laughter when he starts talking about the Trinity? IN the highest church setting you could be in in Mormonism other than the Temple…

It was a good talk. I’m not sure that it ever mentioned Catholics or Catholicism. I heard no laughter.

Nobody denies that Mormons and Catholics have theological disagreements. And it’s perfectly fine for Mormons and Catholics to talk about them. It’s perfectly fine for Catholics and Mormons to argue for their positions, and to seek to refute the positions of those who disagree with them.

Still, I simply don’t hear the Mormon attacks on the Catholic Church that you claim are common.

It seems rather odd that, though I’ve been all over the place, I’ve never encountered what you say is inescapable, everywhere.

 

[Religio71]

was that the one where Elder Holland talked about Mormons being Christian? I think I remember him saying that the Trinity was “three Persons in one substance”. At least get the Trinity right if you’re critiquing it. Sadly even traditional Christians sometimes get it wrong.

 

[Religio71]

It was a good talk. I’m not sure that it ever mentioned Catholics or Catholicism. I heard no laughter.

Nobody denies that Mormons and Catholics have theological disagreements. And it’s perfectly fine for Mormons and Catholics to talk about them. It’s perfectly fine for Catholics and Mormons to argue for their positions, and to seek to refute the positions of those who disagree with them.

Still, I simply don’t hear the Mormon attacks on the Catholic Church that you claim are common.

It seems rather odd that, though I’ve been all over the place, I’ve never encountered what you say is inescapable, everywhere.

Actually, I’m listening to it right now.

youtube.com/watch?v=-yPQR4UlXqs

Fast forward to 4:40. He completely confused the actual belief on the Trinity. No wonder it’s a “mystery” and “confusing” to him.

 

[po18guy]

We have a duty before God to lead them to revealed truth and away from the teachings of a single false prophet. There is not a thing wrong with them personally that is not also wrong with us. It is their beliefs that we must oppose. Does it become personal at times? Unfortunately, yes. However, we remain imperfect conduits of a perfect message.

We are also called to reject relativism - that philosophy which holds that any and all beliefs are of equal importance and are due equal consideration. This is nonsense!

 

[Synneve]

Actually, I’m listening to it right now.

I heard one spell of laughter, when he made a quip. But I heard no mocking of Catholicism, nor, unless I’m mistaken, any mention of Catholicism at all. “It is not our purpose to demean any person’s belief,” he says, “nor the doctrine of any religion.” And I didn’t hear him doing so.

Tundramom cites Elder Holland’s brief talk as typical of Mormon attacks on other faiths. I would agree that it’s pretty typical, in the sense that it’s about as aggressive and negative as we tend to get.

Fast forward to 4:40. He completely confused the actual belief on the Trinity. No wonder it’s a “mystery” and “confusing” to him.

I heard no misstatement.

Do you believe that the Trinity is not a “mystery” of the faith? Google “trinity mystery of the faith” and see whether Elder Holland is alone in terming it a “mystery.”

Do you believe that the average Christian believer could articulate the doctrine of the Trinity in a manner that would satisfy most professors of theology? That certainly hasn’t been my experience.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Do you believe that the average Christian believer could articulate the doctrine of the Trinity in a manner that would satisfy most professors of theology? That certainly hasn’t been my experience.

Satisfy professors of theology? Or, satisfy you?

I’m curious. What is the purpose of this test? What happens if you don’t pass? What happens if you do?

 

[Synneve]

Satisfy professors of theology? Or, satisfy you?

Either. I don’t much care.

I’m curious. What is the purpose of this test? What happens if you don’t pass? What happens if you do?

Religio71 objects to Elder Holland’s description of the doctrine of the Trinity as a “mystery” and as “confusing.”

A simple Google search will support his reference to it as a “mystery,” and, unless your experience with ordinary mainstream Christians is dramatically different than mine, a simple survey of professing Christians – even communicant ones – will confirm that a very large number of them are confused by it. (In my own personal experience, those who assault my belief very commonly end up expressing, as their own belief, some form or another of confused modalism.)

That’s my point. A very simple one. I’m not arguing that orthodox Nicene Trinitarianism isn’t true, though I would cheerfully do that elsewhere.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Either. I don’t much care.

Religio71 objects to Elder Holland’s description of the doctrine of the Trinity as a “mystery” and as “confusing.”

A simple Google search will support his reference to it as a “mystery,” and, unless your experience with ordinary mainstream Christians is dramatically different than mine, a simple survey of professing Christians – even communicant ones – will confirm that a very large number of them are confused by it. (In my own personal experience, those who assault my belief very commonly end up expressing, as their own belief, some form or another of confused modalism.)

That’s my point. A very simple one. I’m not arguing that orthodox Nicene Trinitarianism isn’t true, though I would cheerfully do that elsewhere.

There is no Catholic teaching that God is going to give us a theology test at the time of our judgment. Why should we be concerned what a non-believer judges of us?

Holland’s talk has been addressed here previously. Like many words that mormons appropriate from Christianity, mystery, as Holland used it, is not accurate. He uses it as a rhetorical slam against the GOD, who we worship.

Yes, I believe you would cheerfully bash the God we believe in.

 

[Religio71]

I heard one spell of laughter, when he made a quip. But I heard no mocking of Catholicism, nor, unless I’m mistaken, any mention of Catholicism at all. “It is not our purpose to demean any person’s belief,” he says, “nor the doctrine of any religion.” And I didn’t hear him doing so.

Tundramom cites Elder Holland’s brief talk as typical of Mormon attacks on other faiths. I would agree that it’s pretty typical, in the sense that it’s about as aggressive and negative as we tend to get.

I heard no misstatement.

Do you believe that the Trinity is not a “mystery” of the faith? Google “trinity mystery of the faith” and see whether Elder Holland is alone in terming it a “mystery.”

Do you believe that the average Christian believer could articulate the doctrine of the Trinity in a manner that would satisfy most professors of theology? That certainly hasn’t been my experience.

My posting the link to the talk was in reference to your saying “I heard no laughter”, when indeed there was. Also, who said he had mentioned Catholicism? Tundramom specifically said that he was discussing the Trinity, which is of course a standard, traditional Christian belief. I think that is about as “aggressive” as LDS get in a public, in person, setting. I have seen various comments much more aggressive in other online forums, particularly by ex-Catholics.

Who is the average Christian? Are we talking about people that go to church only on Easter or Christmas? Or people that actually know their Faith(s)? I would say that the average Catholic and Orthodox Christian knows that God is one, yet 3 persons. They know that they are “consubstantial/one in Being”, they know that Jesus was begotten of the Father. They know that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (and the Son). How do they know these things? Because we recite the Nicene Creed every Sunday.

-Elder Ballard contrasted the LDS belief that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are One in all ways, except that they are “3 persons, combined in one substance”. This is not the Trinity. They aren’t “in” one substance, they are one substance.

-The Athanasian Creed is not a “reformulation” of the Nicene Creed. It is a further defining of the Trinity.

-We do not believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are “abstract”. They are real, actual Persons. Through the Holy Spirit, we can come to know God. Jesus Christ came to earth as the God-man. So I don’t agree with “unknowable”. We can’t fully know God, but we can know all that was revealed by Jesus Christ, and we truly come to know and experience God not only by the power of the Holy Spirit, but every week, in the Eucharist, where Jesus Christ is truly present.

-Jesus Christ was bodily resurrected, then ascended. Thus I don’t agree with God not having a body. The second Person of the Trinity has a body.

-“All three persons are incomprehensible”-See above. This is false.

-“We declare it is self-evident from the Scriptures that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are separate Persons…”-Yes, Catholics believe this. It’s right in the Catechism.

His argument on whether God the Father has a body is a little contrived. He starts off saying “why is it repugnant if Jesus Christ has a body?” That misses the point, that it is not “repugnant” for the Father to have a body, there just isn’t a Scriptural or historical basis for that belief. He further mentions the Incarnation, the Atonement, and the Resurrection. Thus continuing that logical argument, it stands to reason that therefore the Father went through those as well.

He also forgets other doctrines related to the nature of God in his thesis that the LDS theology is more scriptural and the actual Christian belief, especially that God the Father has a spouse, the Heavenly Mother, for which we find no scriptural or historical Christian basis for that belief.

So, I see a number of misinterpretations of the Trinity that I have seen in other places where LDS discuss the Trinity. Of course I won’t limit this to LDS, however in their attempt to posit their view as the correct one, they misunderstand the Trinity. Yes, ultimately we cannot fully know the nature of God, thus we say it is a mystery. However we do know much, and it was not just defined at the Council of Nicaea, the Council of Ephesus, etc. One should understand the purpose of Ecumenical Councils before referencing them.

OK, I think I just went really off topic, so if you’d like to further discuss the nature of God (always a fun topic), feel free to start a thread.

 

[Synneve]

I don’t intend to start any threads at all.

Every one of your allegations about his supposed “misstatements” is debatable, though.

You surely can’t be surprised that a non-Nicene-Trinitarian is less than fully impressed and convinced by Nicene Trinitarianism.

My experience with communicant Christians, even in their own churches, has been that few can articulate the doctrine of the Trinity with any coherence. (This doesn’t surprise me a bit, of course, since, with others [including a pair of non-LDS Christian philosophers whose articles I can provide for you at some point], I believe it to be literally incoherent.) Usually, I get modalism. That has been my almost completely consistent experience over a very long period of time.

 

[Religio71]

Either. I don’t much care.

Religio71 objects to Elder Holland’s description of the doctrine of the Trinity as a “mystery” and as “confusing.”

A simple Google search will support his reference to it as a “mystery,” and, unless your experience with ordinary mainstream Christians is dramatically different than mine, a simple survey of professing Christians – even communicant ones – will confirm that a very large number of them are confused by it. (In my own personal experience, those who assault my belief very commonly end up expressing, as their own belief, some form or another of confused modalism.)

That’s my point. A very simple one. I’m not arguing that orthodox Nicene Trinitarianism isn’t true, though I would cheerfully do that elsewhere.

Feel free to start another thread to discuss LDS vs. Traditional understandings of God.

See above for my response. God is fully a mystery, but that doesn’t mean we can’t say a lot about what He has revealed. Elder Holland’s characterization of what we believe as believing that God is completely unknowable is false. In fact, we believe that we commune with God in a very powerful and real way every time we step foot in a Catholic (or Orthodox) church, and when we partake in the Eucharist. Also, I don’t think it’s as confusing as people think.

And I do think our experience with “mainstream” Christians may be a little different than yours, since we are traditional Christians, and go to various church activities with others. I do think that many may not fully understand it, but a larger percentage, in my experience, fully understand what the Nicene Creed means. And yes, modalism comes up from both sides.

So again, start another thread, we can talk about it further.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I think the Mormon religion is just plain wrong from top to bottom. I think that there are some very good people in mormonism, and some very bad people, but most are just people - same as in every religion including Catholicism. I also think that some of the motivation for the good things mormons do may be coming from the wrong place, but again that is just my admittedly outside perspective. My brother converted to the mormon faith over 15 years ago and we are closer than ever. His mormon wife is also a loved family member. I have genuine love for both of them, but I think their religion is fundamentally flawed and spiritually dangerous. If Zerinius were my judge I have a feeling that the verdict would be “Anti-Mormon.” If that’s the standard, then so be it. I’m not going to compromise my good faith beliefs just to make somebody feel better about believing what I know in my heart is simply not true.

If there are any good mormons out there, I would expect you to hold the same set of beliefs about my religion. If we can talk to each other about it without name-calling then that’s fine with me. I would not call such a person an anti-Catholic, but I’m sure there are Catholics on this forum who would. That’s life. Let’s get used to it and move on to a real topic.

Peace,
Robert

 

[imkingdad]

I’m not a Mormon, never was, and don’t think I know any either.

Having said that though, I’m repulsed by Protestant and Catholic attacks on The Latter Day Saints. These are people, Mormons, who:

I frankly don’t care about peoples beliefs. I care deeply about there actions. Let’s unite with the mormons on issues we care about and stop the fighting!

Your list is Interesting & I’m sure far more differences can be listed vs the points that you listed & admire. I would agree whole-heartedly with your closing thoughts and the fact that Mormons usually make good & decent Neighbors.

Now to your “Bashing” Point. Since you intentionally left the Term undefined I’ll have to proceed as best I can. It is NOT Bashing to defend & uphold our Catholic Church, Bible, History, Moral values etc. from the constant onslaught of various Protestant & Other Purportedly Christian groups.

It is Not Bashing to point out those areas of Disagreement nor is it Bashing to repudiate the falsehoods that are propagated against us and the Church, which Christ Jesus Established and has maintained for 2000 years.

I have had & continue to engage Mormons in everyday life & sometimes we discuss our common & divergent Points of View. If the Catholics you refer to are good Practical Catholics I would surmise that they recognize any elements of God’s Truth that may exist within these groups and try & build a dialogue along those lines.

It has been my experience that it is the Catholic Church that is Bashed, Attacked, Denigrated, Smeared, Libelled & Denied by those Protestant and Other ( JWs, Mormons, etc.) groups as they attempt to justify their existence & to validate their schismatic behaviors at our expense.

In closing, I’d like to encourage you to develop your apologetic talents a tad more.
After all, it is Important that you Care about a person’s Beliefs, since as a Catholic you are required by Baptism to Witness to the Truth of the Gospel and to Evangelize for it as well. You seem to be a good, caring & loving person and this is what is needed to be a successful person in defending our Faith and an essential element in evangelizing for it too.

Regards, Your’s in Christ, Vivat Jesus!

 

[Religio71]

I don’t intend to start any threads at all.

Every one of your allegations about his supposed “misstatements” is debatable, though.

You surely can’t be surprised that a non-Nicene-Trinitarian is less than fully impressed and convinced by Nicene Trinitarianism.

My experience with communicant Christians, even in their own churches, has been that few can articulate the doctrine of the Trinity with any coherence. (This doesn’t surprise me a bit, of course, since, with others [including a pair of non-LDS Christian philosophers whose articles I can provide for you at some point], I believe it to be literally incoherent.) Usually, I get modalism. That has been my almost completely consistent experience over a very long period of time.

As one that actually believes in, and understands the Trinity, I am 100% certain that the above were actual misunderstandings of the Trinity by Elder Ballard.

And I agree with Rebecca, there is no Trinity theology test that will be given after death. In my view, all that is essential for Christians to know is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three Persons, separate and distinct, yet are one in essence, one God. That Jesus, fully God, incarnated on earth, and became man. That He was begotten of the Father. And that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (and the Son). We say this every week at Mass. If people aren’t paying attention, that’s their problem.

Ok, if you don’t want to start another thread, then we don’t have to analyze the Trinity or the LDS Godhead further, as it’s off topic.

 

[dianaiad]

As one that actually believes in, and understands the Trinity, I am 100% certain that the above were actual misunderstandings of the Trinity by Elder Ballard.

And I agree with Rebecca, there is no Trinity theology test that will be given after death. In my view, all that is essential for Christians to know is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three Persons, separate and distinct, yet are one in essence, one God. That Jesus, fully God, incarnated on earth, and became man. That He was begotten of the Father. And that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father (and the Son). We say this every week at Mass. If people aren’t paying attention, that’s their problem.

Ok, if you don’t want to start another thread, then we don’t have to analyze the Trinity or the LDS Godhead further, as it’s off topic.

With all due respect, that sounds like a Trinity theology test to me…

 

[imkingdad]

I don’t intend to start any threads at all.

Every one of your allegations about his supposed “misstatements” is debatable, though.

You surely can’t be surprised that a non-Nicene-Trinitarian is less than fully impressed and convinced by Nicene Trinitarianism.

My experience with communicant Christians, even in their own churches, has been that few can articulate the doctrine of the Trinity with any coherence. (This doesn’t surprise me a bit, of course, since, with others [including a pair of non-LDS Christian philosophers whose articles I can provide for you at some point], I believe it to be literally incoherent.) Usually, I get modalism. That has been my almost completely consistent experience over a very long period of time.

Well from a Catholic Perspective you can place yourself amongst those that can not articulate the doctrine of the Trinity with any coherence much less Biblical references. I won’t even get into the other Grand Flaws that have no scriptural or Historical Evidences that are LDS dogma. suffice it to say that if Mormons can ever find proof of a horse being on either American Continent prior to the arrival of the Spanish they would begin to have the 1st scintilla of any evidence of the 2 lost tribes & the Great War as set forth by the “angel” Moroni.

 

[Religio71]

With all due respect, that sounds like a Trinity theology test to me…

Not really. The essentials of the Trinity are recited during Mass/Divine Liturgy, and at other liturgies, and should be taught in catechesis. There is no need to get into the heavy theology such as how it differs from Arianism, modalism, etc. If one understands the Nicene Creed, that is the essence of the Trinity. Sadly many people don’t try to understand what they believe. Even LDS get their theology mixed up, with Jesus described as a “half-deity” in “The Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles”. I’ve seen this denounced on MADB of course.