Why are people mormon considering it is obvioulsy fabricated?

[Religio71]

in one thread on MADB, whyme saw no problem with one partaking in the Eucharist and holding a temple recommend. This is blasphemy in both the LDS Church and the Catholic Church. I’m guessing he doesn’t even believe in the Real Presence, since that is what the Eucharist is about/is. If you believe in the Real Presence, then you believe in the authority of the Catholic Church to cause it to occur. But then to hold a temple recommend, you affirm the restoration and the authority of the LDS prophet, apostles, and priesthood.



His logic is basically, if one can find beauty in both faiths, then why not break the rules of both?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Hi why me

Well that is embarrassing. I am disappointed in myself. I should have used an illustration I understood better but it came to mind and I didn’t have the energy to research it better. So you guys could never go to a largely allegorical, figurative interpretation as Catholics have with the early chapters of Genesis? Oh well. I still hold to my original premise, but for good reason, my Catholic friends won’t be terribly impressed with my first attempt at explaining and defending LDS teaching.

Rory, aka 3DOP

There are LDS member who believe the BoM is allegorical. Other mormon split-offs have taken a stance, as a church, that it is allegorical.

 

[RebeccaJ]

in one thread on MADB, whyme saw no problem with one partaking in the Eucharist and holding a temple recommend. This is blasphemy in both the LDS Church and the Catholic Church. I’m guessing he doesn’t even believe in the Real Presence, since that is what the Eucharist is about/is. If you believe in the Real Presence, then you believe in the authority of the Catholic Church to cause it to occur. But then to hold a temple recommend, you affirm the restoration and the authority of the LDS prophet, apostles, and priesthood.



His logic is basically, if one can find beauty in both faiths, then why not break the rules of both?

It’s nice to wear temple garments while receiving Communion.

 

[twopekinguys]

in one thread on MADB, whyme saw no problem with one partaking in the Eucharist and holding a temple recommend. This is blasphemy in both the LDS Church and the Catholic Church. I’m guessing he doesn’t even believe in the Real Presence, since that is what the Eucharist is about/is. If you believe in the Real Presence, then you believe in the authority of the Catholic Church to cause it to occur. But then to hold a temple recommend, you affirm the restoration and the authority of the LDS prophet, apostles, and priesthood.



His logic is basically, if one can find beauty in both faiths, then why not break the rules of both?

BINGO!!!

We have a Winner!!!

 

[twopekinguys]

It’s nice to wear temple garments while receiving Communion.

Why do the old sayings…“get your knickers in a knot”, and “panties in a bunch” come to mind here?

 

[dianaiad]

There has been a debate within the lds church over the hemispheric model or limited geography model. I would say that the hemispheric model held sway for quite some time but now it seems that the limited geographic model is catching on. But in no way do mormons claim that it is all figurative. Mormons believe that the book of mormon is an historical account of a people who lived in the new world.

Indeed we do…and you are right about the limited geography model.

 

[dianaiad]

whyme actually created a thread on MADB all about how “nice” this website is, as in, how because Catholic Answers wants to proclaim the Truth of the Catholic Faith, and what we perceive as the falsehoods of another, it is anti-Mormon. He has a couple of these threads about how “not nice” we are over here. Newsflash: Catholicism believes that it is the Church of Jesus Christ. We believe that we are the Church founded by Christ, continuing the fullness of the Gospel. Therefore, we see all other faiths as being based in non-truth. That is especially true for the LDS Church, which says that Christianity apostasized, and therefore they are the restoration of true Christianity. We don’t believe that, and that is why we discuss what we see as the falsehoods of the LDS Church. While many may be nice people, being nice doesn’t mean salvation. So if you don’t like us saying that the LDS Church is based on falsehoods, which, if we are to actually *believe * Catholic doctrine, then you can always go back to MADB. The very statement that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ, with the fullness of the Gospel, means that the LDS Church is not God-given. Plain and simple.

You should always defend your Faith no matter what. Look at the martyrs of the Church. It’s not “oh, I don’t need to defend it here”. You defend Mormonism always, but never defend Catholicism. You say the Mormon truth claims are strong and powerful, and they feel the Holy Spirit. We haven’t seen you say that to the Mormons here in reference to Catholicism.

Oh well, what can we expect from someone whose avatar on MADB is Joseph Smith.

Do you understand the difference between defending your own faith and attacking the faith of others?

 

[dianaiad]

It’s nice to wear temple garments while receiving Communion.

That depends entirely upon who is administering it and who is receiving it, don’t you think?

 

[robert7685]

Of course it is okay to claim that it is a counterfeit to the truth but you will also need to prove it. And this you cannot do. I think that it is great that you may be a catholic but you cannot claim that the lds church is not true. To my understanding, the Father Of Lies does not create something good and if he does do such things, I would have to blame Heavenly Father for allowing him to do so.

Let me put it this way: the devil creates something that encourages people to pray to heavenly father often, remain chaste, obey the commandments, and read the scriptures?

The Devil created what appears
to be good. To illustrate my point, I refer you to the story of Eve being tempted in the Garden of Eden. If you are familiar with it, you will know that the serpent mixed truth in with lies. In doing so he made the trap all the more insideous and effective. He promised that they would not die (lie) and that they would be as gods, knowing good and evil (truth). Let’s examine your list.
1.Pray to heavenly father often. The LDS concept of God is incorrect. Rather than teaching of the trinity they teach of multiple gods when the Bible makes it clear that there is only one God.
2. Remain chaste That is truth, mixed in to help create confusion.
3. Obey the commandments Also truth.
4. Read the Scriptures. Correction. Read what the LDS view as scripture, which can include the Book Of Mormon, the Doctrine & Covenants, the Pearl Of Great Price, and words spoken by Church Leaders. Of course the bible is included in the list, but with footnotes leading to a “Joseph Smith Translation” that adds verses and even whole passages. These notes also reordered other verses. All of this was done to back up LDS teachings which otherwise would appear to be incorrect.(i.e. "In my Father’s house there are many mansions was changed via footnote to say “there are many kingdoms,” undoubtedly to lend credibility to the teaching about different heavens.

I could go on and on, but That might not be kind to readers. However, I will encourage careful research ( I say careful because some who take issue with Mormonism have credibility problems themselves, like Ed Decker for instance). In a nutshell: The Devil only needs to add a little error in order to lead souls from the truth, which is Jesus Christ.

Has Mormonism been proven wrong beyond a doubt? No. Though a thorough examination does show it to be suspect.

 

[dianaiad]

Why do the old sayings…“get your knickers in a knot”, and “panties in a bunch” come to mind here?

I dunno why. There’s just something about underwear that brings out the 12 year old male in people. It’s the Beavis and Butthead syndrome.

Here’s the thing: Catholics wear, and treat with great reverence, crucifixes, rosaries and crosses. They have icons/statues in their homes, and small altars with candles in front of which they pray. Their clergy has specific clothing to wear, each item of which has a theological meaning, and symbolizes something special. I’m quite certain that you see nothing odd, silly or ludicrous about any of that, and you would be quite right. There isn’t. Whatever spiritual symbol you use should be treated with respect, not only by you, but by everybody else, too—because they ARE your religious symbols; they all help you in your faith, remind you of your beliefs, and build your sense of belonging and community. All those things are good things.

Now we wear our liturgical garments, not outside where everybody can see, but next to our skins; they are to remind US of our beliefs, not to advertise them to everybody else. Perhaps it is a paradigmatic difference that you might find difficult to understand, but hey, you expect us to understand you, right? So how about giving understanding us a try?

The garments we wear are sacred to us because they are symbolic of our faith; reminding us, as your rosary does you, of our beliefs. Because we wear them constantly, because we must choose our outer clothing to accommodate them, because wearing them affects everything we do, we are constantly reminded of why we wear them.

Besides, they are extremely comfortable, cool in the summer (no chaffing) and warm in the winter–ensuring modest dress for men and women alike, and ensure that no LDS woman who wears them EVER needs to worry about panty lines–and ‘plumber’s crack’ isn’t something a Mormon ever has to worry about. That’s…just bonus.

 

[Religio71]

i agree, there isn’t anything necessarily wrong with having sacred undergarments.

 

[twopekinguys]

I dunno why. There’s just something about underwear that brings out the 12 year old male in people. It’s the Beavis and Butthead syndrome.

Here’s the thing: Catholics wear, and treat with great reverence, crucifixes, rosaries and crosses. They have icons/statues in their homes, and small altars with candles in front of which they pray. Their clergy has specific clothing to wear, each item of which has a theological meaning, and symbolizes something special. I’m quite certain that you see nothing odd, silly or ludicrous about any of that, and you would be quite right. There isn’t. Whatever spiritual symbol you use should be treated with respect, not only by you, but by everybody else, too—because they ARE your religious symbols; they all help you in your faith, remind you of your beliefs, and build your sense of belonging and community. All those things are good things.

Now we wear our liturgical garments, not outside where everybody can see, but next to our skins; they are to remind US of our beliefs, not to advertise them to everybody else. Perhaps it is a paradigmatic difference that you might find difficult to understand, but hey, you expect us to understand you, right? So how about giving understanding us a try?

The garments we wear are sacred to us because they are symbolic of our faith; reminding us, as your rosary does you, of our beliefs. Because we wear them constantly, because we must choose our outer clothing to accommodate them, because wearing them affects everything we do, we are constantly reminded of why we wear them.

Besides, they are extremely comfortable, cool in the summer (no chaffing) and warm in the winter–ensuring modest dress for men and women alike, and ensure that no LDS woman who wears them EVER needs to worry about panty lines–and ‘plumber’s crack’ isn’t something a Mormon ever has to worry about. That’s…just bonus.

Diana,

I understand mormons hold their garments in great regard, and that is fine. If that is what your faith calls for, then I say go for it. Even though I don’t agree with it.

Don’t you think it’s wrong to wear temple garments and receive Holy Communion at a Catholic Church?

I think what you might be missing in some of these posts, is the fact that why me claims to be Catholic and LDS, and his obvious anti-Catholic posts are no longer amusing. All one has to do is look at some of the threads he has started here, or at MADB, or some of his posts on various threads on both.

I am far from anti-mormon, but I am surely anti-why me.

Why me’s constant pot shots at the Catholic Church have worn thin with many posters, us included. He is as much anti-Catholic as he accuses many on here of being anti-Mormon.

Even though a thread has been started on this, let me ask you: In your opinion, can a person be both LDS and Catholic?

 

[dianaiad]

Diana,

I understand mormons hold their garments in great regard, and that is fine. If that is what your faith calls for, then I say go for it. Even though I don’t agree with it.

Don’t you think it’s wrong to wear temple garments and receive Holy Communion at a Catholic Church?

Yes. Absolutely–though it’s not the garments that is the issue. Not every Mormon wears them, y’know. Those who have not received their Temple Endowments don’t wear them…and they have no business taking Communion in a Catholic ceremony either. It’s a matter of respect.

I think…perhaps I am putting this a bit strongly, but I do believe it…that for me to take communion in a Catholic service would be showing extreme disrespect to those with me, the service, Communion and the idea behind it. It’s saying to those with me that I thought so little of their faith that I could mock it with impunity. Communion to you is literally partaking of the body and blood of Christ. For me to take it would be very wrong.

By the same token, it would be equally wrong for you, a Catholic, to take the Sacrament in one of our meetings.

I think what you might be missing in some of these posts, is the fact that why me claims to be Catholic and LDS, and his obvious anti-Catholic posts are no longer amusing. All one has to do is look at some of the threads he has started here, or at MADB, or some of his posts on various threads on both.

I am far from anti-mormon, but I am surely anti-why me.

Why me’s constant pot shots at the Catholic Church have worn thin with many posters, us included. He is as much anti-Catholic as he accuses many on here of being anti-Mormon.

Even though a thread has been started on this, let me ask you: In your opinion, can a person be both LDS and Catholic?

Uh…

Nope.

While it IS true that Catholics and Mormons share beliefs and a mindset that neither of us share with the vast majority of Protestants, there is this very big difference between us; the matter of authority. We think we have it. You think you do, and it’s a binary choice, here.

On the other hand, we don’t think you are all going to hell as a result of it.

If that makes a difference.

 

[Religio71]

Diana,

I understand mormons hold their garments in great regard, and that is fine. If that is what your faith calls for, then I say go for it. Even though I don’t agree with it.

Don’t you think it’s wrong to wear temple garments and receive Holy Communion at a Catholic Church?

I think what you might be missing in some of these posts, is the fact that why me claims to be Catholic and LDS, and his obvious anti-Catholic posts are no longer amusing. All one has to do is look at some of the threads he has started here, or at MADB, or some of his posts on various threads on both.

I am far from anti-mormon, but I am surely anti-why me.

Why me’s constant pot shots at the Catholic Church have worn thin with many posters, us included. He is as much anti-Catholic as he accuses many on here of being anti-Mormon.

Even though a thread has been started on this, let me ask you: In your opinion, can a person be both LDS and Catholic?

I agree. If someone is wearing their temple garments and is temple worthy and attends the temple, it is blasphemy to not only the Catholic faith, but the LDS faith for that person to also partake in Catholic sacraments, including the Eucharist, which we believe is the real Body and Blood of Christ. LDS believe that it is symbolic. This is complete disregard for the tenets of both faiths, especially if that person believes that the bread and wine do become the body and blood of Christ in the Catholic Eucharist, since that requires the belief that the Catholic priesthood has authority to do so, when the LDS Church believes that it is the only priesthood authority on earth.

 

[Religio71]

Yes. Absolutely–though it’s not the garments that is the issue. Not every Mormon wears them, y’know. Those who have not received their Temple Endowments don’t wear them…and they have no business taking Communion in a Catholic ceremony either. It’s a matter of respect.

I think…perhaps I am putting this a bit strongly, but I do believe it…that for me to take communion in a Catholic service would be showing extreme disrespect to those with me, the service, Communion and the idea behind it. It’s saying to those with me that I thought so little of their faith that I could mock it with impunity. Communion to you is literally partaking of the body and blood of Christ. For me to take it would be very wrong.

By the same token, it would be equally wrong for you, a Catholic, to take the Sacrament in one of our meetings.

Uh…

Nope.

While it IS true that Catholics and Mormons share beliefs and a mindset that neither of us share with the vast majority of Protestants, there is this very big difference between us; the matter of authority. We think we have it. You think you do, and it’s a binary choice, here.

On the other hand, we don’t think you are all going to hell as a result of it.

If that makes a difference.

Completely agree with you diana . It all comes down to the priesthood authority.

And yes, generally LDS see non-LDS Christians as ending up in the Terrestrial Kingdom, at least from anecdotal evidence. Though it can be thought as a form of Hell, because our eternal progression to godhood is cut off. Though, the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms are still described as A LOT better than this earth and the traditional understanding of Hell, which is similar to Outer Darkness, which very few people will actually go to.

 

[dianaiad]

Completely agree with you diana . It all comes down to the priesthood authority.

And yes, generally LDS see non-LDS Christians as ending up in the Terrestrial Kingdom, at least from anecdotal evidence. Though it can be thought as a form of Hell, because our eternal progression to godhood is cut off. Though, the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms are still described as A LOT better than this earth and the traditional understanding of Hell, which is similar to Outer Darkness, which very few people will actually go to.

Well, you can liken the Terrestrial Kingdom to a form of hell if you want, but since it is the Kingdom that is ‘overseen’ by Jesus Christ, and those there are with Him, I think it’s every inch as much ‘heaven’ as any heaven I have ever seen described by any Protestant or Catholic.

As to who goes there rather than the Celestial Kingdom? Something tells me that there are going to be a LOT of 'non-Mormon Christians" there.

 

[Religio71]

Well, you can liken the Terrestrial Kingdom to a form of hell if you want, but since it is the Kingdom that is ‘overseen’ by Jesus Christ, and those there are with Him, I think it’s every inch as much ‘heaven’ as any heaven I have ever seen described by any Protestant or Catholic.

As to who goes there rather than the Celestial Kingdom? Something tells me that there are going to be a LOT of 'non-Mormon Christians" there.

True, though unless someone does the LDS temple ordinances, whether in this life or the next, they won’t be exalted. And yes, Jesus Christ does minister to the Terrestrial Kingdom, and the Holy Ghost ministers to the Telestial Kingdom, however I have seen a few LDS say that it is a sort of “damnation” because their eternal progression to exaltation is cut off.

 

[dianaiad]

True, though unless someone does the LDS temple ordinances, whether in this life or the next, they won’t be exalted. And yes, Jesus Christ does minister to the Terrestrial Kingdom, and the Holy Ghost ministers to the Telestial Kingdom, however I have seen a few LDS say that it is a sort of “damnation” because their eternal progression to exaltation is cut off.

Well, given that we do proxy ordinances, that ‘this life or the next’ is covered.

I’ve never seen anyone use the word “damnation” or “hell” in relation to the Terrestrial or Telestial Kingdoms until I read it here, frankly. Took me a bit aback when I did, too. I guess it’s because to me, ‘damnation’ means ‘outer darkness’ or Perdition—that place where one experiences an utter absence of God or His influence. Where Satan is, or will be.

 

[Religio71]

Well, given that we do proxy ordinances, that ‘this life or the next’ is covered.

I’ve never seen anyone use the word “damnation” or “hell” in relation to the Terrestrial or Telestial Kingdoms until I read it here, frankly. Took me a bit aback when I did, too. I guess it’s because to me, ‘damnation’ means ‘outer darkness’ or Perdition—that place where one experiences an utter absence of God or His influence. Where Satan is, or will be.

Yes, I can see that. I think that it isn’t really damnation in the traditional sense of Hell/Outer Darkness with Satan and the demons, but damnation in the sense of the prospect of progression to exaltation is cut off, and one isn’t in the eternal presence of the Father.

 

[twopekinguys]

Yes. Absolutely–though it’s not the garments that is the issue. Not every Mormon wears them, y’know. Those who have not received their Temple Endowments don’t wear them…and they have no business taking Communion in a Catholic ceremony either. It’s a matter of respect.

I think…perhaps I am putting this a bit strongly, but I do believe it…that for me to take communion in a Catholic service would be showing extreme disrespect to those with me, the service, Communion and the idea behind it. It’s saying to those with me that I thought so little of their faith that I could mock it with impunity. Communion to you is literally partaking of the body and blood of Christ. For me to take it would be very wrong.

By the same token, it would be equally wrong for you, a Catholic, to take the Sacrament in one of our meetings.

Uh…

Nope.

While it IS true that Catholics and Mormons share beliefs and a mindset that neither of us share with the vast majority of Protestants, there is this very big difference between us; the matter of authority. We think we have it. You think you do, and it’s a binary choice, here.

On the other hand, we don’t think you are all going to hell as a result of it.

If that makes a difference.

I think you and I are on the same page with this.