Why Should a Mormon Become Catholic?

[Marie5890]

In all fairness, this was a totally isolated viewpoint and I have never heard this from any other Mormon. The entire reason I brought it up is that she specifically mentioned the pre-mortal existence as her defense. Now, I personally know people who call themselves Catholic and support a woman’s purported “right” to choose abortion. And I am certain that they would attempt to defend their position based upon what they believe the Church teaches. I’ve never heard what I would consider to be a valid argument, but they have satisfied themselves, somehow. No different with individual Mormons.

Oh ok, thanks for the clarification, Steve. Appreciated.
Yes, that happens with Catholics, too, or any other denomination. The human mind is very powerful in how it protects and defends itself. Or justify itself.

Again, thanks for the fairness of clarifying.

 

[SteveVH]

Oh ok, thanks for the clarification, Steve. Appreciated.
Yes, that happens with Catholics, too, or any other denomination. The human mind is very powerful in how it protects and defends itself. Or justify itself.

Again, thanks for the fairness of clarifying.

Yeah, I certainly didn’t want to leave the impression that this is a Mormon position. I just found her reasoning, based upon pre-mortal existence, interesting and more than a little shocking.

 

[Miriam1947]

I simply can’t believe that lady supported abortion. From what I had been around, all of LDS should not support abortion. That was supposed to be their belief too.

Becca, this was very enlightening to me.

“We have no revelation on abortion”

Didn’t you assume Mormons were pro-life? That’s certainly the image their church attempts to broadcast, and most Mormons, in fact, mistakenly believe their church opposes abortion and regards it as an objective evil. But not so.Indeed, the Mormon church accepts abortion for a number of reasons. The Church Handbook of Instructions, approved in September, 1998, states that abortion may be performed in the following circumstances: pregnancy resulting from rape or incest; a competent physician says the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy; or a competent physician says that the “fetus” has severe defects that will not allow the “baby” to survive beyond birth. In any case, the persons responsible must first consult with their church leader and receive God’s approval in prayer (156).

This same Handbook, the official policies of the Mormon church to be followed by all local church leaders throughout the world, also claims: “It is a fact that a child has life before birth. However, there is no direct revelation on when the spirit enters the body” (156). Previous teachings by former Mormon prophets referred to the unborn child as “a child,” “a baby,” a “human being,” and decried abortion as “killing,” “a grievous sin,” “a damnable practice.” Spencer W. Kimball, the prophet who died in 1985, taught, “We have repeatedly affirmed the position of the church in unalterably opposing all abortions” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 189).

It appears that this “unalterable” position, constantly “affirmed,” is just another in a series of doctrinal and moral teachings that Mormons have reworded, reworked, rescinded, or reneged—though never officially renounced. Such is the quality of the Mormon belief in “continuing revelation.” Don’t expect dogmatic or ethical consistency. Rather, look for expediency and conformity with “the times.”

A further statement in the Handbook says: “The church has not favored or opposed legislative proposals or public demonstrations concerning abortion (156).” While the Mormon prophet claims to speak the mind and will of God, he can neither figure out when the unborn child becomes human or if it is God’s desire that we protect the unborn unconditionally.

Your Mormon friend will offer the excuse that his church leaves many decisions to the free agency (free will) of its people, and that abortion is one such concern. You might point out the irony in the fact that the Mormon church has no hesitation or uncertainty in making the following declarations:

1. “The church opposes gambling in any form” (including lotteries). Members are also urged to oppose legislation and government sponsorship of any form of gambling (Handbook, 150).
2. The church also opposes [correctly, of course] pornography in any form (158).
3. Church members are to reject all efforts to legally authorize or support same-sex unions (158).

There is no need for a member to pray for divine guidance or seek church approval for such activities, for there will be no divine or ecclesiastical finessing of morality to permit even an occasional bingo game. A prayerful game of poker, unrepented, will bar the member from the temple and ultimate salvation; a prayerful, by-the-book abortion, unrepented, won’t.
catholic.com/tracts/mormon-stumpers

 

[SteveVH]

Becca, this was very enlightening to me.

“We have no revelation on abortion”

Didn’t you assume Mormons were pro-life? That’s certainly the image their church attempts to broadcast, and most Mormons, in fact, mistakenly believe their church opposes abortion and regards it as an objective evil. But not so.Indeed, the Mormon church accepts abortion for a number of reasons. The Church Handbook of Instructions, approved in September, 1998, states that abortion may be performed in the following circumstances: pregnancy resulting from rape or incest; a competent physician says the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy; or a competent physician says that the “fetus” has severe defects that will not allow the “baby” to survive beyond birth. In any case, the persons responsible must first consult with their church leader and receive God’s approval in prayer (156).

This same Handbook, the official policies of the Mormon church to be followed by all local church leaders throughout the world, also claims: “It is a fact that a child has life before birth. However, there is no direct revelation on when the spirit enters the body” (156). Previous teachings by former Mormon prophets referred to the unborn child as “a child,” “a baby,” a “human being,” and decried abortion as “killing,” “a grievous sin,” “a damnable practice.” Spencer W. Kimball, the prophet who died in 1985, taught, “We have repeatedly affirmed the position of the church in unalterably opposing all abortions” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 189).

It appears that this “unalterable” position, constantly “affirmed,” is just another in a series of doctrinal and moral teachings that Mormons have reworded, reworked, rescinded, or reneged—though never officially renounced. Such is the quality of the Mormon belief in “continuing revelation.” Don’t expect dogmatic or ethical consistency. Rather, look for expediency and conformity with “the times.”

A further statement in the Handbook says: “The church has not favored or opposed legislative proposals or public demonstrations concerning abortion (156).” While the Mormon prophet claims to speak the mind and will of God, he can neither figure out when the unborn child becomes human or if it is God’s desire that we protect the unborn unconditionally.

Your Mormon friend will offer the excuse that his church leaves many decisions to the free agency (free will) of its people, and that abortion is one such concern. You might point out the irony in the fact that the Mormon church has no hesitation or uncertainty in making the following declarations:

1. “The church opposes gambling in any form” (including lotteries). Members are also urged to oppose legislation and government sponsorship of any form of gambling (Handbook, 150).
2. The church also opposes [correctly, of course] pornography in any form (158).
3. Church members are to reject all efforts to legally authorize or support same-sex unions (158).

There is no need for a member to pray for divine guidance or seek church approval for such activities, for there will be no divine or ecclesiastical finessing of morality to permit even an occasional bingo game. A prayerful game of poker, unrepented, will bar the member from the temple and ultimate salvation; a prayerful, by-the-book abortion, unrepented, won’t.
catholic.com/tracts/mormon-stumpers

Interesting. Thanks for this, Miriam.

 

[jediliz]

Becca, this was very enlightening to me.

“We have no revelation on abortion”

Didn’t you assume Mormons were pro-life? That’s certainly the image their church attempts to broadcast, and most Mormons, in fact, mistakenly believe their church opposes abortion and regards it as an objective evil. But not so.Indeed, the Mormon church accepts abortion for a number of reasons. The Church Handbook of Instructions, approved in September, 1998, states that abortion may be performed in the following circumstances: pregnancy resulting from rape or incest; a competent physician says the life or health of the mother is in serious jeopardy; or a competent physician says that the “fetus” has severe defects that will not allow the “baby” to survive beyond birth. In any case, the persons responsible must first consult with their church leader and receive God’s approval in prayer (156).

This same Handbook, the official policies of the Mormon church to be followed by all local church leaders throughout the world, also claims: “It is a fact that a child has life before birth. However, there is no direct revelation on when the spirit enters the body” (156). Previous teachings by former Mormon prophets referred to the unborn child as “a child,” “a baby,” a “human being,” and decried abortion as “killing,” “a grievous sin,” “a damnable practice.” Spencer W. Kimball, the prophet who died in 1985, taught, “We have repeatedly affirmed the position of the church in unalterably opposing all abortions” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 189).

It appears that this “unalterable” position, constantly “affirmed,” is just another in a series of doctrinal and moral teachings that Mormons have reworded, reworked, rescinded, or reneged—though never officially renounced. Such is the quality of the Mormon belief in “continuing revelation.” Don’t expect dogmatic or ethical consistency. Rather, look for expediency and conformity with “the times.”

A further statement in the Handbook says: “The church has not favored or opposed legislative proposals or public demonstrations concerning abortion (156).” While the Mormon prophet claims to speak the mind and will of God, he can neither figure out when the unborn child becomes human or if it is God’s desire that we protect the unborn unconditionally.

Your Mormon friend will offer the excuse that his church leaves many decisions to the free agency (free will) of its people, and that abortion is one such concern. You might point out the irony in the fact that the Mormon church has no hesitation or uncertainty in making the following declarations:

1. “The church opposes gambling in any form” (including lotteries). Members are also urged to oppose legislation and government sponsorship of any form of gambling (Handbook, 150).
2. The church also opposes [correctly, of course] pornography in any form (158).
3. Church members are to reject all efforts to legally authorize or support same-sex unions (158).

There is no need for a member to pray for divine guidance or seek church approval for such activities, for there will be no divine or ecclesiastical finessing of morality to permit even an occasional bingo game. A prayerful game of poker, unrepented, will bar the member from the temple and ultimate salvation; a prayerful, by-the-book abortion, unrepented, won’t.
catholic.com/tracts/mormon-stumpers

More proof they are not a church that truly follows Christ. Jesus would love any child, no matter the circumstances of conception or no matter the “defects”.

So, basically they can look at Rebecca Kiessling and tell her she should have been aborted. Or tell Trig Palin his life should have been ended before he was born because he is “defective”.

The True Church that Jesus founded does not support abortion!

 

[LivingWaters7]

One resource that I think would be very helpful to LDS in understanding the Catholic view on the Church never failing is a booklet called “The Continuity of the Catholic Church”, by Bishop Duane Hunt, who was the Bishop of Salt Lake City from 1937-1960 (when he died). As one can see from the Table of Contents, he touches on various matters that LDS interested in apologetics and defense of their belief in a total apostasy of the ancient Church would find important, such as:

-Scriptural Predictions
-Continuity of Doctrines
-The Baptism of Infants
-The Methods of Baptizing
-Celibacy
-Support of the Clergy
-Completeness of Revelation
-The Veneration of Mary
-Lives of the Popes

He says:

"My thesis is stated very simply: The Church which our Lord established is continuous from Him to the present day and will be continuous until the end of the world. This means, first of all, that the body of the Church, the organisation, has lived every day during the past nineteen centuries and will continue to live every day until the end of the world. It means, furthermore, that the soul of the Church, her doctrines, her ideals, her means of grace, and her supernatural protection, have remained constant, that they have not changed and never will change."

The intro also says:
**
“In a charitable and objective manner, Bishop Hunt shows that this theory has no
foundation in the scriptural and historical record. In fact all the facts and evidence point
to the Catholic Church of today being one and the same with the institution that Jesus
Christ founded, nearly two thousand years ago.”**

I think this is a very valuable resource, especially with LDS that may be familiar with the many LDS books and articles written by apologists attempting to demonstrate that the Great Apostasy is Biblical and has historical evidences. Enjoy!

transporter.com/Mormonism/continuity.html

 

[Marie5890]

(LW, without going into specifics, just wondering how your journey is going? Doing ok?..)

 

[coolduude]

Sounds to me, Living Waters, that you know what to do. Posting this thread was just looking for a push in the right direction (which is great!)

Now get thee to Confession

 

[PaulDupre1]

Hope I was of some help to you. The issue of pre-mortal existence is at the heart of Mormon theology and influences nearly all of the rest of their beliefs. It can result in some pretty strange conclusions. I have mentioned this before, but it is still a great example. There was a Mormon woman on an LDS forum that defended abortion based upon her belief that a pre-mortal soul chose to be the one who was aborted, therefore who were we to say he/she should not have made that choice?

My LDS niece told me several years ago that aborted spirits (babies) get the opportunity to be born into more worthy (i.e.: LDS) families, so abortion isn’t that bad. In fact, the knowledge of this fact is one of the most beautiful testimonies of the restored gospel. She absolutely glowed when she was telling me this.

I am, to this day, horrified.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

 

[TexanKnight]

My LDS niece told me several years ago that aborted spirits (babies) get the opportunity to be born into more worthy (i.e.: LDS) families, so abortion isn’t that bad. In fact, the knowledge of this fact is one of the most beautiful testimonies of the restored gospel. She absolutely glowed when she was telling me this.

I am, to this day, horrified.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

I was taught the same thing

 

[Becca3]

My LDS niece told me several years ago that aborted spirits (babies) get the opportunity to be born into more worthy (i.e.: LDS) families, so abortion isn’t that bad. In fact, the knowledge of this fact is one of the most beautiful testimonies of the restored gospel. She absolutely glowed when she was telling me this.

I am, to this day, horrified.

Paul (formerly LDS, now happily Catholic)

I never heard that before but frankly, abortion is bad every which way you go.

 

[LivingWaters7]

(LW, without going into specifics, just wondering how your journey is going? Doing ok?..)

Well, to keep it simple: after much prayer, study (a ton on both sides), talking to people (on both sides and other sides), etc, I’ve concluded that I already had 1.5 feet back in Catholicism for the last few months, and that I was only kidding myself. Tomorrow, after a few errands, I’ll be going to Confession! Wasn’t an easy decision to make (as far as doubting myself, what ifs), but it just seemed obvious after awhile, especially with the scriptural promises God made as to the continuity of His Church, His Kingdom (in both the Old and New Testaments).

Catholics Come Home-Epic

We Are Catholic

Catholicism Series

 

[pablope]

Well, to keep it simple: after much prayer, study (a ton on both sides), talking to people (on both sides and other sides), etc, I’ve concluded that I already had 1.5 feet back in Catholicism for the last few months, and that I was only kidding myself. Tomorrow, after a few errands, I’ll be going to Confession! Wasn’t an easy decision to make (as far as doubting myself, what ifs), but it just seemed obvious after awhile, especially with the scriptural promises God made as to the continuity of His Church, His Kingdom (in both the Old and New Testaments).

Catholics Come Home-Epic

We Are Catholic

Catholicism Series

Didn’t you have subtle hints too?

Anyway, just out of curiosity…and I apologize if you had posted this before…what made you go LDS in the first place?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Didn’t you have subtle hints too?

Yes.

Anyway, just out of curiosity…and I apologize if you had posted this before…what made you go LDS in the first place?

What really attracted me was the concept of having prophets, as well as the concept of continuing revelation. It just made sense to me that there would still be prophets, and that revelation from God would continue in the true Church. Having apostles also was attractive, as I wasn’t convinced about bishops replacing apostles. I also was attracted by their view on infant baptism (that infants go to Heaven if they die, and don’t need baptism, as they believe that we become accountable for our sins at age 8), as I was disturbed by what seemed to be uncertainty in the Catholic position on what happens to infants that die without baptism (seen as a “hope”, but not certainty that they would go to God’s presence/Heaven). I liked the emphasis on personal revelation. I liked having additional scriptures and the concept that we would have more (though, as I was telling a coworker over the weekend, I highly doubt that any additional texts will be discovered and translated by the LDS prophets). I liked the concept of an embodied God the Father, but couldn’t believe that He was once a man that progressed to Godhood, and that we follow His example (as various LDS prophets have taught).

I also believed the common apologetic argument of “Joseph Smith and/or his associates couldn’t have known xyz” as far as restoration of ancient beliefs. Things like pre-mortal existence, washing and anointing, deification, etc. While I can get into specific on each point, the overarching issue is that these “evidences” are taken from over here and over there. This person and that person. There is no unified “Church of Jesus Christ of Former-day Saints” that LDS can point to with those unique beliefs that are supposed to have been restored. LDS apologists, such as Michael Ash, would say that these beliefs were held by “the ancient/early/primitive Church”, and they are also now held by the restored Church. But then, he wouldn’t be able to point to that organized “ancient Church” that believed such things, since it didn’t exist. When I read others saying the same thing, with the same reference to a “Former-day Saints” Church, I knew I wasn’t alone on that.

But what always gave me pause was the Great Apostasy, a total, complete apostasy of Christ’s Church. It really is untenable, not supported by the Old nor New Testaments. I searched threads here and over at Mormon Dialogue and Discussion Board, and read thoughts from both sides (as well as various books and articles on both sides). I found the posts by the poster Soren1, here and MDDB, and they were extremely helpeful in providing exegesis on relevant OT and NT passages, showing that the Apostasy simply is not supported. God is faithful, even when we aren’t, and provided a means by which His Kingdom could be perpetuated.

 

[HojaVerde]

Well, to keep it simple: after much prayer, study (a ton on both sides), talking to people (on both sides and other sides), etc, I’ve concluded that I already had 1.5 feet back in Catholicism for the last few months, and that I was only kidding myself. Tomorrow, after a few errands, I’ll be going to Confession! Wasn’t an easy decision to make (as far as doubting myself, what ifs), but it just seemed obvious after awhile, especially with the scriptural promises God made as to the continuity of His Church, His Kingdom (in both the Old and New Testaments).

Catholics Come Home-Epic

We Are Catholic

Catholicism Series

God bless you!

 

[twopekinguys]

I’ve concluded that I already had 1.5 feet back in Catholicism for the last few months, and that I was only kidding myself. Tomorrow, after a few errands, I’ll be going to Confession!

See, sometimes it doesn’t take a 2 x 4!!

Good for you, congratulations!!!

I’m still praying for you.

(Let us know if you burst into flames…LOL )

 

[Miriam1947]

Well, to keep it simple: after much prayer, study (a ton on both sides), talking to people (on both sides and other sides), etc, I’ve concluded that I already had 1.5 feet back in Catholicism for the last few months, and that I was only kidding myself. Tomorrow, after a few errands, I’ll be going to Confession! Wasn’t an easy decision to make (as far as doubting myself, what ifs), but it just seemed obvious after awhile, especially with the scriptural promises God made as to the continuity of His Church, His Kingdom (in both the Old and New Testaments).

Catholics Come Home-Epic

We Are Catholic

Catholicism Series

Wow thanks so much for the We Are Catholic link. Great!

 

[CompSciGuy]

So I hesitated posting this thread, but thought, what the heck.

For the past few days, I’ve been really feeling a “pull” towards just getting up, going to the local parish, going to Confession/Reconciliation, repenting, and becoming Catholic again. Seeing all of my Scott Hahn books on the shelf isn’t helping either (especially his latest, Consuming the Word: The New Testament and the Eucharist in the Early Church, which is fantastic). I dunno, it might happen soon…

DO IT!!! DO IT!!! DO IT!!! DO IT!!!

Anyway, many Mormons have misconceptions about the Catholic Church, its doctrines, history, and practices. Many also find great comfort in certain LDS beliefs, such as:

-temples and eternal families
-prophets, revelation from God to man (including personal revelation), church guided by revelation, Heaven not being “closed” (in their view)
-apostles, priesthood
-“one true church”

So, the point of this thread is to talk about what is it about Catholicism that should cause Mormons to pause, get out of their comfort zone, and look at the Catholic Church? Both churches claim to be the One True Church. They both can’t be right (maybe both are wrong! but we’ll skip that).

Easy. Just look at history.

Many Mormons are familiar with a story (I’m giving this off the top of my head) of how a Catholic (maybe it was a priest) said to a Mormon that either the LDS Church is right (and that a restoration of Christ’s Church was needed) or the Catholic Church is right (and Christ’s Church continues to exist since He established it, never needing a restoration). Various LDS apologetic books include that story, then go on to investigate the LDS viewpoint. This thread is therefore about the Catholic viewpoint, whether it’s about the apostasy (or lack thereof), specific doctrines (including the nature of God), sacraments, etc. Why should a Mormon look at a Catholicism, and go so far as to convert, especially when they find comfort and really believe the things I listed above?

Let’s keep it civil (and no “because it’s true” or “because Joseph Smith was a liar and a charlatan”), especially for the LDS lurkers that may be curious!

Why should a Mormon want to become a Catholic? Because he/she has reason to believe that it is the one, true faith and the Church instituted by Christ himself. As for the claim of apostasy, do you really think that this Church, which Christ founded himself and said that the gates of hell will never prevail against it, and gave it the Holy Spirit to guide it, do you really think that God would abandon this church and give it over to Satan, and then appear 1800 years later and give an entirely new set of teachings that don’t even remotely resemble the original ones?

Like I said before, it’s all about history and consistency. If it isn’t consistent, it isn’t worthy of belief.

 

[Miriam1947]

Well, to keep it simple: after much prayer, study (a ton on both sides), talking to people (on both sides and other sides), etc, I’ve concluded that I already had 1.5 feet back in Catholicism for the last few months, and that I was only kidding myself. Tomorrow, after a few errands, I’ll be going to Confession! Wasn’t an easy decision to make (as far as doubting myself, what ifs), but it just seemed obvious after awhile, especially with the scriptural promises God made as to the continuity of His Church, His Kingdom (in both the Old and New Testaments).

Catholics Come Home-Epic

We Are Catholic

Catholicism Series

Welcome back home, LivingWaters7. I’m glad, glad, glad, glad, glad that you are coming back to the Church. YAY!

:clapping::dancing::extrahappy::tiphat:

 

[Miriam1947]

Found this awesome little video

youtube.com/watch?v=a9po_rkGTc4