THE IMPOSSIBLE GOSPEL OF MORMONISM: PLAN OF SALVATION

Mormon Infographics ^ | November 27, 2012

[PeevedPatriot]

Ignatius meant it to mean the whole body of Christ - the universal church of Jesus Christ throughout the world. So all those who have received Jesus Christ as Savior and believe and follow Him are members of the catholic church (universal church) - small 'c' like you said.

I think you're taking a bit of liberty with Ignatius! In paragraph 8 of his epistle to the Smyrnaeans he writes that we are to follow the bishop as Christ does the Father, the priest as we would the apostles, and reverence the diaconate as an institution of God. He writes, "Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop." He says that what a bishop approves is pleasing to God. He says it's not lawful to baptize apart from the Bishop and that Eucharist is only properly celebrated by a Bishop or his designee. Those are NOT the words of someone stating that any believer anywhere is part of a universal catholic church!

[BlueDragon]

Typical whitewash. I see through it. Some other time I'll explain, but for now, enough with this thread-hijacking...

What do you think of the Mormon theology chart? Not exactly kosher, is it?

[PeevedPatriot]

Don’t know what I’m whitewashing but whatever. I’m here to give a defense of my faith, not mock or tear apart the faith of others. Peace be with you.

[BlueDragon]

No comment on “the impossibility of Mormonism”, the title of this thread? Well okey-dokey

[Natural Law]

"...absence of genuine liberty..."

That is an interesting notion, but nothing is farther from the truth. For Catholics liberty is not defined as being free to do what we want, but it is being free to do what we ought. That freedom comes from discipline a formed conscience and faith. As an example you are a very articulate writer. That is not because you are free to write whatever nonsense you choose, but is a result of years of rigorous study and training that allows you to be free to express your ideas thoroughly and concisely. Similarly, Michael Jordon may have been the free-est person ever to step foot on a basketball court, but not because he wanted to be. There are million that want that freedom, but because he spent countless hours working on his craft.

Perhaps the greatest example of freedom is the complete detachment or Christ on the cross. Naked He was free from the desire for wealth and material things, mocked and humiliated He was free from the desire for honor and prestige, brought to the limits of human endurance He was free from the pursuit of pleasure, nailed hand and foot to the cross and surrounded by Roman soldiers he was free from the pursuit of power.

Protestants are free to accept or reject Scriptural interpretations as they personally deem correct, free to accept the doctrines and dogmas that resonate with them, free to select a Canon that agrees with them. They are free to excuse or embrace abortion, contraception, same sex marriage, women priests and bishops, divorce and a host of other fashionable thoughts and practices. That is between them and God. Catholics choose a higher freedom.

Peace be with you.

[Running On Empty]

Well done, good and faithful servant.

[Running On Empty]

Thank you for your words about the sufferings of Christ, and how those “freedoms” you speak of that were won for us to redeem us and call us to be His very own.

Meditation on these mysteries of His Passion have sustained me many years of my life.

[Natural Law]

"Thank you for your words...."

You are welcome, but those are not original thoughts. St. Thomas Aquinas taught that if you want to see the perfect exemplification of the Beatitudes you should look to Christ crucified. If you want happiness (beatitude) despise what Jesus despised on the cross and love what He loved on the cross.Jesus despised the four worldly addictions of wealth, power, pleasure and honor. On the cross He loved the will of His Father. Poor in spirit, meek, mourning, and persecuted He was able to be pure of heart, to seek righteousness utterly, to become the ultimate peacemaker and to be the perfect conduit of divine mercy to the world. The paradox of the cross was that Christ crucified was the freest and happiest He could be.

Peace be with you.

[Elsie]

nope, I don't...if you recieve a valid baptism, regardless of where, or by whom, or when...you are baptized Catholic

Aye; THERE's the rub! VALID!!

What do that MEAN??

And just WHO gets to be the JUDGE of it?

[Elsie]

Of course, there were (and are) certain people that feel they alone are entitled to use the word - almost like they copyrighted it.

---

 

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,

' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'  

[Elsie]

Of course, there were (and are) certain people that feel they alone are entitled to use the word - almost like they copyrighted it.

---

Just like MORMONs now claim to be 'christians' because they have used the Lord's name - placing it in...

The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints

[Elsie]

Of course, there were (and are) certain people that feel they alone are entitled to use the word - almost like they copyrighted it.

---

HMMmm...

---

Media Letter   

26 June 2008 — Salt Lake City  (http://newsroom.lds.org/additional-resource/media-letter)

*The following is a letter from Elder Lance B. Wickman, General Counsel of the Church to publishers of major newspapers, TV stations and magazines. It was sent out on Tuesday, June 24, 2008.

---

---

---

Recent events have focused the media spotlight on a polygamous sect near San Angelo, Texas, calling itself the “Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.” As you probably know, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has absolutely no affiliation with this polygamous sect. Decades ago, the founders of that sect rejected the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, were excommunicated, and then started their own religion. To the best of our knowledge, no one at the Texas compound has ever been a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Unfortunately, however, some of the media coverage of the recent events in Texas has caused members of the public to confuse the doctrines and members of that group and our church. We have received numerous inquiries from confused members of the public who, by listening to less than careful media reports, have come to a grave misunderstanding about our respective doctrines and faith. Based on these media reports many have erroneously concluded that there is some affiliation between the two – or even worse, that they are one and the same.

Over the years, in a careful effort to distinguish itself, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has gone to significant lengths to protect its rights in the name of the church and related matters. Specifically, we have obtained registrations for the name “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” “Mormon,” “Book of Mormon” and related trade and service marks from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and corresponding agencies in a significant number of foreign countries.

We are confident that you are committed to avoiding misleading statements that cause unwarranted confusion and that may disparage or infringe the intellectual property rights discussed above. Accordingly, we respectfully request the following:

1. As reflected in the AP Style Guide, we ask that you and your organization refrain from referring to members of that polygamous sect as “fundamentalist Mormons” or “fundamentalist” members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
2. We ask that, when reporting about this Texas-based polygamous sect or any other polygamous group, you avoid either explicitly or implicitly any inference that these groups are affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
3. On those occasions when it may be necessary in your reporting to refer to the historical practice of plural marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that you make very clear that the Church does not condone the practice of polygamy and that it has been forbidden in the Church for over one hundred years. Moreover, we absolutely condemn arranged or forced “marriages” of underage girls to anyone under any circumstances.

Stated simply, we would like to be known and recognized for whom we are and what we believe, and not be inaccurately associated with beliefs and practices that we condemn in the strongest terms. We would be grateful if you could circulate or copy this letter to your editorial staff and to your legal counsel.

We thank you for your consideration of these important matters.

Sincerely,

Lance B. Wickman

General Counsel

[Elsie]

Decades ago, the founders of that sect rejected the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, were excommunicated, and then started their own religion.

excommunicated?

I wonder WHY?

For following MORMON 'scripture' perhaps???

---

The Doctrine and Covenants

Section 132

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded 12 July 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, and also the plurality of wives (see History of the Church, 5:501–7). Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.

.

.

.

58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.

---

 

58 Now, as touching the law of the ^apriesthood, there are many things pertaining thereunto.

59 Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was ^aAaron, by mine own voice, and by the voice of him that ^bsent me, and I have endowed him with the ^ckeys of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name, and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit ^dsin, and I will justify him.

60 Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God.

61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse ^aanother, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.

62 And if he have ^aten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.

63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to ^amultiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be ^bglorified.

64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.

65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take ^aHagar to wife.

66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega. Amen.

[Elsie]

Excommunication comes from disobedience in certain matters only.

HMMMmmm...

[Elsie]

In paragraph 8 of his epistle to the Smyrnaeans he writes that we are to follow the bishop as Christ does the Father, the priest as we would the apostles, and reverence the diaconate as an institution of God. He writes, "Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop." He says that what a bishop approves is pleasing to God.

Dang!

Ol' Ezra must have had some RCC in his background! (#104)

[Elsie]

I am free to leave the Church whenever I wish and entrust myself to the mercy of God.

Indeed; for we have an Advocate with the Father: Jesus Christ of Nazareth...

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fCXpPINYxk

 

"…But rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven"   Luke 10.20     http://www.hymnary.org/text/lord_i_care_not_for_riches

[Cronos]

Err.. Colofornian -- the religious orders are groups of priests or monks or nuns who form a community. The core beliefs are the same across all of these religious orders

They are not mini-denominations, not even denominations -- as I told you above, your comparison is quite wrong. You could probably compare these to I guess different battalions in the army -- some have different styles of doing things, but the core beliefs are the same

Among non-Catholic groups, the comparison is like different national armies -- there are some aims in common among some, but not among all

[Cronos]

Likewise, among the Catholic splinter orders, there are distinctives in church govt. -- err.. there are no "splinter orders" in terms of core religious dogma

So the Catholics have all these relatively autonomous Benedictines, Augustinians, and Cistercians on the loose...structured under a highly distinctive govt...just like the Protestants arrange themselves distinctly church govt wise -- these are the ways different groups of monks organize themselves, yet all believe in core dogmas -- for instance in the True Presence in the Eucharist

You cannot compare the religious orders to Protestants -- that is quite different as, taking the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist -- you may not believe that, but Lutherans do

Or take another core, fundamental religious belief, the Trinity and lets take your denomination of pentecostalism -- many pentecostals believe in the Triune Godhead, but Oneness Pentecostals do not

Or even in something like the keeping of Sabbath -- for most evangelicals it is on Sunday, some may say Saturday, but the Seventh Day Adventists say that Sunday keeping is the mark of the beast

These are core dogmatic differences between various non-Catholic groups, and it is erroneous to compare that to organization differences in religious orders which still hold the same core religious dogma.

[Cronos]

The Jansenist is a good point you bring up, but note that they retained the core Christian beliefs in the True Presence in the Eucharist etc. and we don't say that we do not dispute on additional matters like in the 1600s on the Jansenists and the 1980s liberation theology -- the key point is that they don't go backwards and demolish core fundamentals

in contrast if you look at the places outside the Church you start with say Lutheranism which retains a belief in Christ's True Presence in the Eucharist and that's quite different from Calvinism which rejects it utterly. Then others took this rejection of fundaments further with opposition to infant baptism, then others took it further back to reject the Trinity and even others (Jehovah's Witnesses) took it back even further to reject Christ's divinity

[Cronos]

all of the various religious orders of priests, monks, nuns say “This is the rule of Christ. We'll follow it – and Him" -- the whole of Christ's teachings passed down through His apostles are retained in common by the various orders of priests, monks, nuns etc

Now tery and I as laity go to different Churches with priests from different orders and the mass is the same, the beliefs are the same, wherever

Even take Jesuits and Benedictines -- they visit each other, they share the same dogmatic beliefs. Their religious organization may differ, but the Church beliefs are Church beliefs -- This is the rule of Christ which His Church obeys