Posted on 02/19/2008 4:46:10 PM PST by Zakeet
In his pursuit of the presidency, Mitt Romney held fast to his Mormon faith, though his religion remains controversial with evangelicals and some other Christians. But his determined (and ultimately futile) wooing of evangelicals led him to make some statements that didn't quite square with Mormon beliefs and culture. And the effort itself may have deepened the impression of him as inauthentic—even to some fellow Mormons.
Early in his presidential bid, Romney was asked what he thought of polygamy. Prompted by what they considered a divine revelation, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discontinued the practice more than a century ago, and the church distances itself from polygamist "fundamentalists." But Romney went one step further, saying he couldn't "imagine anything more awful than polygamy." Many Mormons were privately taken aback. Mormons believe that, in its time, "plural marriage" was a commandment from God, and they are, as a group, fiercely proud of their ancestors, hundreds of whom practiced polygamy. (Romney's own great-grandfather had five wives.) LDS church members loathe the polygamy stereotypes and jokes bandied by outsiders. But hearing Romney—the most recognizable face of their faith these days—disavow it in those terms was mildly unsettling to LDS insiders.
Others were puzzled to hear Romney say he reads the Gideon Bible—a version popular with evangelicals: Mormons uniformly study the King James version, in a Salt Lake edition that is cross-referenced to all other Mormon scripture. "Seems like he just figured he had to say the safest, most Protestant thing he could think of—that was kind of annoying," says Russell Arben Fox, a Mormon professor of political science at Friends University in Wichita, Kans.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
We do reject the Nicene Creed, which Christ never taught. We do believe that “faith without works is dead,” which is Biblical, but which mightily offends some of of you. I think that some of the misunderstanding between Evangelicals and Mormons arises from the fact that we use different terminology to refer to the same things.
I do think, however, that the complete rejection of the necessity of works is an abominable doctrine. If people think they can break the commandments with impunity just by shouting “Jesus,” they are more likely to do it.
Huh? 'Gideon' isn't a version, it's a... well, a non-profit publisher, I guess. And as far as I know, it's only "popular" with hotel furniture.
In other words, you would be a Catholic if your spiritual forefathers had not rejected Catholicism the same way that Joseph Smith rejected the Protestantism which surrounded him.
___________________________________________
NO...
Apples and oranges...
Joseph Smith chose to spit on the Gospel of Jesus Christ and tossed aside the Bible...and made up something else...
Martin Luther and the other Protestants of his time chose to believe the Bible that was not being preached at the time...
Remember “Justification through faith” ???..Romans 4:1-5, Ephesians 2:8, 9
And the 95 Theses of Martin Luther
Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther (1517)
Published in:
Works of Martin Luther:
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol.1, pp. 29-38
_______________
Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.
In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.
2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.
3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.
4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.
5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.
6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God’s remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.
7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.
8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to them, nothing should be imposed on the dying.
9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.
10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.
11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.
12. In former times the canonical penalties were imposed not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.
13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.
14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.
15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.
16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.
17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.
18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.
19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.
20. Therefore by “full remission of all penalties” the pope means not actually “of all,” but only of those imposed by himself.
21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope’s indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;
22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.
23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.
24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.
25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.
26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.
27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].
28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.
29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.
30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.
31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.
32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.
33. Men must be on their guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to Him;
34. For these “graces of pardon” concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.
35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.
36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.
37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.
38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.
39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.
40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].
41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.
42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend the buying of pardons to be compared in any way to works of mercy.
43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;
44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.
45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.
46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.
47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.
48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.
49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.
50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter’s church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.
51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope’s wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.
52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.
53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.
54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.
55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.
56. The “treasures of the Church,” out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.
57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.
58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.
59. St. Lawrence said that the treasures of the Church were the Church’s poor, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.
60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ’s merit, are that treasure;
61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.
62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.
63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.
64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.
65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.
66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.
67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the “greatest graces” are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.
68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.
69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.
70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.
71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!
72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!
73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.
74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.
75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God — this is madness.
76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.
77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.
78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.
79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.
80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.
81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.
82. To wit: — “Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.”
83. Again: — “Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”
84. Again: — “What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God, and do not rather, because of that pious and beloved soul’s own need, free it for pure love’s sake?”
85. Again: — “Why are the penitential canons long since in actual fact and through disuse abrogated and dead, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences, as though they were still alive and in force?”
86. Again: — “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?”
87. Again: — “What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?”
88. Again: — “What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?”
89. “Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?”
90. To repress these arguments and scruples of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christians unhappy.
91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.
92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace!
93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!
94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;
95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.
“co-religionist” ????
Would that be meant as an anti-Christian bigotted slur ????
Why would that be a slur?
A FEW SIMPLE QUESTIONS:
As man now is, God once was. As God now is, Man may become.
Or in other words, you can call yourself a tree, but that doesn't make you a tree.
Not a bad "apologetic" post from an LDS apologetical view, LL...from a "Christian" perspective just a wee bit of a problem with your narrow interpretation of Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, vv. 18-20. That "wee" problem is the "broad" and "blunt" slam of the LDS Church that ALL non-Mormon churches are "apostate."
Yeah, we know it'd be nice if you could just slam the churches of Joe's home town in NY (from your perspective, "Obviously, they deserved it.")
Yeah, we know it'd be nice if you could just slam the Christian posters on FReeper threads (from your perspective, "Yup, they ESPECIALLY deserve it.")
The problem is the Mormon claim of the apostasy is all-inclusive...and it's rather slyly deceptive of you to suggest that it's anything less than universal.
But I'm glad you posted the other portion of that LDS "Scripture" section because it's rarely quoted...it's a fascinating eye-opener to see how much Joseph Smith relied only on feelings...a burning of the bosom...a burning elsewhere (marrying 9-ll wives already married to other men), not to mention the dozens of others--including young teens...note all the "feeling" words below Smith used to judge people he didn't know (what? you're going to take the word of a 14 yo kid that he was able to correctly assess every church and church leader in the region & beyond? Smith did what 14 yo confused kids do...they base evaluations entirely upon FEELINGS):
Smith: ...religious feeling, in order to have everybody converted, as they were pleased to call it, let them join what sect they pleased; yet when the converts began to file off, some to one party and some to another, it was seen that the seemingly good feelings of both the priests and the converts were more pretended than real; for a scene of great confusion and bad feeling ensued -- priest contending against priest, and convert against convert; so that all their good feelings one for another...
You: I never fully understood those paragraphs until I started reading some of the anti-Mormon stuff on FR, posted by "Christians" who saw no irony in being ugly and insulting in order to prove that they are more "Christian" than us Mormons.
Mormons more than anyone should be quite sensitive to what it's like to be pushed or "ushered" out of their homes (Missouri & Nauvoo). A number of those "gentile" folks weren't what I would call "hospitable"--many whom took LDS homes & land after they left.
Now think of this word picture: Folks in Christ are "settled" in as Christians...along comes somebody who accuses ALL (not some) these Christian "sects" folks of being "corrupt"...they are accused of embracing ALL (not some) creeds which are abominable...what's more, he AND his immediate followers accuse ALL of them of being "apostates"...he and his followers basically accuse every Christian & every Christian sect of belonging to the spiritual graveyard, and attempt to bury them...And just like the "Gentiles" who came & took over the LDS land in MO & IL, the Mormons come as squatters and camp on the so-called "graveyard" of Christianity...Whenever anyone visits the squatters huddling over the alleged graveyard of Christianity and claims that "No, those Christians aren't dead, they're alive & well, thank you" the common retort is, "Oh, so you think these dead folks we spiritually buried are more 'Christian' than us Mormons, eh? Well, we're as much a Christian as they are/were."
When we object to our alleged apostate graveyard status, too many LDS don't ever seem to have qualms about pushing us out of our "home" identity as "Christians." (Please note the endless stream of LDS insinuations that if we "dare" even try to establish any definitional "boundaries" as to what a "Christian" is we are acting in some "self-righteous" manner).
Imagine a Mormon online discussion where some LDS folks are putting down some of the practices of polygamous fundamentalist Mormons. Could you then imagine the utter gall if a polygamous fundamentalist Mormon said to the LDS folks:
...to be honest, I never fully understood those paragraphs until I started reading some of the anti-fundamentalist Mormon stuff on XYZ,posted by "Mormons" who saw no irony in being ugly and insulting in order to prove that they are more "Mormon" than us fundamentalist Mormons.
So you're telling us that being a "Mormon" is a "Mormon" and that fundamentalist polygamous "Mormons" are both "Mormons" and also "Christians" too? (I mean who would you be, according to your apologetic, to tell Warren Jeffs' successor(s) that they are not either "Mormon" or "Christian?"
“Joseph Smith chose to spit on the Gospel of Jesus Christ and tossed aside the Bible...and made up something else...
Martin Luther and the other Protestants of his time chose to believe the Bible that was not being preached at the time...
Remember “Justification through faith” ???..Romans 4:1-5, Ephesians 2:8, 9”
Joseph didn’t spit on the Gospel, he began the process of restoring it in its fulness.
He did not cast aside the Bible. I spent all of the last two years teaching the Bible in Sunday School. We believe it to be the Word of God, although there are problems with translation and some doctrinal points have been changed or removed over the years, as every serious Biblical scholar now recognizes. One good case in point is the Johannine Comma, which is the best scriptural support for the Nicene Creed, but which, everyone now recognizes, was added by a Monk to the Vulgate version hundreds of years after Christ.
Of course we cannot be justified without faith. We need faith and works. None of us is perfect. None of us can be perfect in keeping the law, and we therefore need the atonement of Christ for our sins. We gain the advantage of that Atonement through faith in Him.
Ah. Then you believe you are my judge? You don’t believe it is between me and Christ, but that I must accept all of your creeds and doctrines?
We do believe that “faith without works is dead,” which is Biblical
____________________________________________
How do you deal with Romans 4:1-5 and Ephesians 2:8, 9 ???
Whaty shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God anbd it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is couynted for righteousness. Romans 4:1-5
For by grace are ye saved through fait: and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God. NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast Ephesians 2:8, 9
That’s what really bothers you, isn’t it? The success we Mormons have in converting your co-religionists.
I do think, however, that the complete rejection of the necessity of works is an abominable doctrine.
_______________________________________
The Apostle Paul didnt think that way..
Romans 4:1-5... Ephesians 2:8, 9
How do you deal with James?
You'll find BoM's in Utah!
I got one in St. George once.
I've still got it.
I do think, however, that the complete rejection of the necessity of works is an abominable doctrine.
_______________________________________
And Jesus didnt think that way
Jesus said “It is finished” as he died on the cross to save us...John 19:30
What Jesus did was a completed work of salvation...
or Jesus was a liar...
Just like Joseph Smith said He was...
Paul was right. None of us can be “justified,” meaning united with Christ, simply through the law, because none of us is perfect. The only perfect being, Christ, died to atone for our imperfect in keeping the law. Paul was speaking to persons who believed that the law was all that is required. He was emphasizing the need for the Atonement, and that none of us can be justified without it. But that doesn’t mean the commandments no longer count.
James was right, too. Faith without works is dead.
What are you going to do about Jesus ???
What?
Folks were voting for him just because he was the same faith as THEMSELVES?
Our 'lay pastors' are spokemen for THEIR religion!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.