In Joseph Smith's day prominent Americans were disgusted with the creeds of Christendom. (excerpt)

In Joseph Smith's day some of the most prominent Americans were disgusted with the creeds of Christendom. Thomas Jefferson said:

I [Jefferson] am a real Christian, that is to say a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the preachers . . of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said or did.

They have compounded from the heathen mysteries a system beyond the comprehension of man of which Jesus, were he to return on earth, would not recognize one feature. . . . It is the speculations of crazy theologians which have made a Babel out of religion (Saul K. Padover, Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, 1939, pp. 122-123).

Writing to S. Hales in 1818, Jefferson wrote: "The truth is that Calvinism has introduced into the Christian religion more new absurdities than its leaders had purged it of old ones" (Ibid., p. 219).

On Jefferson's monument in Washington, D.C., is inscribed: "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." If his complete quotation were on the monument it would bring out the fact that Jefferson was speaking against the dergy of his day (Ibid., p. 119).

Benjamin Franklin, replying to a letter from Ezra Styles, president of Yale, said shortly before his death:

As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left it to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes (Carl Van Doren, Benjamin Franklin, 1941, p. 777).

The first great work expressing the deistic feeling in America was Thomas Paine's Age of Reason, considered to have generated the greatest stir of any book of its day. It made clear that Paine was not an atheist as some claimed, but a deist because of the tyranny and bigotry he found in the existing churches (Thomas Paine, Age of Reason, 1793, p. 287).

Speaking of the period in America between 1670 and 1830, renowned theologian Paul Tillich has said, "First among the educated classes, then increasingly in the mass of industrial workers, religion lost its 'immediacy,' and it ceased to offer an unquestioned sense of direction and relevance to human living" (Roland N. Stromberg, Religious Liberalism, 1954, p. 1).

Carlyle has said of the Colonial Period: "An age fallen languid and destitute of faith and terrified of skepticism" (Ibid., p. ix).

Of this time Carl L. Becker has said, "What we have to realize is that in those years God was on trial" (Ibid., p. 1).

The impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, have established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the earth (Peter H. Odegard, Religion and Politics, 1960, p. 110).

It is also true that in Colonial America only about 5 percent of the population belonged to any church and that those who did come to America for religious reasons did not come here initially to seek freedom of religion except for themselves. This is certainly an indictment against religion in Joseph Smith's day.

Nowhere in the old world at the beginning of American colonization was there anything like religious toleration. . . . It is sad but not surprising to recall that even the religious dissenters who found refuge in America were, with notable exceptions, no more disposed toward toleration than the oppressors of the old world Obid., p. 9).

Historian William Warren Sweet says, "The rise of an intense anticlericalism was another cause of opposition to the churches." Further he relates: "The United States began as a free and independent nation with organized religion at a low ebb" (William Warren Sweet, Religion in the Development of American Culture, 1952, p. 92.).

B-Chan””Yes.””

You're right and the Church knew the enemies of Christianity,especially freemasonry,an important factor in establishing the US.

Here is a walk through some Catholic history that you're probably aware of regarding freemasonry

From “IN EMINENTI from POPE CLEMENT XII- 1738
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Clem12/c15inemengl.htm

Excerpt;
Therefore, bearing in mind the great harm which is often caused by such Societies or Conventicles not only to the peace of the temporal state but also to the well-being of souls, and realizing that they do not hold by either civil or canonical sanctions; and since We are taught by the divine word that it is the part of faithful servant and of the master of the Lord's household to watch day and night lest such men as these break into the household like thieves, and like foxes seek to destroy the vineyard; in fact, to prevent the hearts of the simple being perverted, and the innocent secretly wounded by their arrows, and to block that broad road which could be opened to the uncorrected commission of sin and for the other just and reasonable motives known to Us; We therefore, having taken counsel of some of Our Venerable Brothers among the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, and also of Our own accord and with certain knowledge and mature deliberations, with the plenitude of the Apostolic power do hereby determine and have decreed that these same Societies, Companies, Assemblies, Meetings, Congregations, or Conventicles of Liberi Muratori or Francs Massons, or whatever other name they may go by, are to be condemned and prohibited, and by Our present Constitution, valid for ever, We do condemn and prohibit them.

From-DELL'APOSTOLICO SEGGIO -From Pope Leo XIII 1890
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18901015_dall’alto-dell’apostolico-seggio_en.html

Excert:
It is needless now to put the Masonic sects upon their trial. They are already judged; their ends, their means, their doctrines, and their action, are all known with indisputable certainty. Possessed by the spirit of Satan, whose instrument they are, they burn like him with a deadly and implacable hatred of Jesus Christ and of His work; and they endeavour by every means to overthrow and fetter it.

From HUMANUM GENUS- Pope Leo XIII
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18840420_humanum-genus_en.html

13. In those matters which regard religion let it be seen how the sect of the Freemasons acts, especially where it is more free to act without restraint, and then let any one judge whether in fact it does not wish to carry out the policy of the naturalists. By a long and persevering labor, they endeavor to bring about this result - namely, that the teaching office and authority of the Church may become of no account in the civil State; and for this same reason they declare to the people and contend that Church and State ought to be altogether disunited. By this means they reject from the laws and from the commonwealth the wholesome influence of the Catholic religion; and they consequently imagine that States ought to be constituted without any regard for the laws and precepts of the Church.
14. Nor do they think it enough to disregard the Church - the best of guides - unless they also injure it by their hostility. Indeed, with them it is lawful to attack with impunity the very foundations of the Catholic religion, in speech, in writing, and in teaching; and even the rights of the Church are not spared, and the offices with which it is divinely invested are not safe. The least possible liberty to manage affairs is left to the Church; and this is done by laws not apparently very hostile, but in reality framed and fitted to hinder freedom of action. Moreover, We see exceptional and onerous laws imposed upon the clergy, to the end that they may be continually diminished in number and in necessary means. We see also the remnants of the possessions of the Church fettered by the strictest conditions, and subjected to the power and arbitrary will of the administrators of the State, and the religious orders rooted up and scattered.

And from Cardinal Ratzinger before he became Benedict XVI

DECLARATION ON MASONIC ASSOCIATIONS
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19831126_declaration-masonic_en.html

Excerpt;
Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.

It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 1981 pp. 240-241; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9 March 1981).

“I’m confused by this comment. I stated my beliefs, and this is what you come back with. “

Stating you are confused is not a question, FRiend. It is
a statement. I am sorry you are confused.

“I have CFIDS (Chronic Fatigue and Immune Dysfunction Syndrome) which sometimes impairs my ability to comprehend things.”

That sounds tough to deal with on a daily basis (I’ve known
someone with CFS). There are some alternative therapies that
have been a help to some friends I know with CFS.

‘If you know I believe in Jesus Christ, where did I lose you?’

I certainly hope you do believe in Christ. When a mormonism
follower says those words, though, they generally mean
a different Christ, a different God and mean something quite
different than Christians mean - and in conflict with what
the Bible teaches when it uses the same words. No doubt there
are followers of mormonism that really do know Christ, but
the teachings of mormonism don’t help someone get to Christ.

The demons believe too...

best,
ampu

...I certainly hope you do believe in Christ. When a mormonism follower says those words, though, they generally mean a different Christ, a different God and mean something quite different than Christians mean - and in conflict with what the Bible teaches when it uses the same words. No doubt there are followers of mormonism that really do know Christ, but the teachings of mormonism don’t help someone get to Christ....

I believe in Jesus Christ. There is only ONE Jesus Christ, and He is Lord. I can recall my Primary days (shoved aside by other religions over the years) in which I was taught about the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I was not taught about "one of them." I was taught of the One and Only.

Therein lies my confusion: I AM A CHRISTIAN!! I follow the Teachings of Jesus Christ! I believe in His Father, God, and I believe in the Holy Ghost.

I do NOT understand how you can say that Mormons believe in a "different" Jesus Christ, when there is only ONE, and there has NEVER been another. He took all our sins upon Him, atoning for each of us who ever lived, are living and ever will live.

Demons may believe, but they have no bodies and therefore, will not benefit from Christ's atonement.

Did someone tell you that Mormons don't believe in the Bible? Some of the most beautiful Scriptural Beliefs are contained in the Bible, both the Old Testament, and the New. I will never discount Scriptures from any source, including the Dead Sea Scrolls. Or anything found since then. I will continue to keep an open mind, as I feel that Revelation has many sources.

...a different God and mean something quite different than Christians mean...

So, if I tell you I believe in the only True Savior, Jesus Christ, doesn't that make me a Christian? If not, please enlighten me, as I may have been praying to a Lord who does not exist.

>>>I believe in Jesus Christ. There is only ONE Jesus Christ, and He is Lord. I can recall my Primary days (shoved aside by other religions over the years) in which I was taught about the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I was not taught about “one of them.” I was taught of the One and Only.

There is, of course, just one True Christ. There are many
false Christs. Mormonism has theirs. Moony-ism has theirs.
I have know idea which you are referring to. Perhaps you
can describe Him?

>>>Therein lies my confusion: I AM A CHRISTIAN!! I follow the Teachings of Jesus Christ! I believe in His Father, God, and I believe in the Holy Ghost.<<<

I certainly hope you are! As to the Father and the Holy Ghost... Mormonism has theirs. Other groups have theirs.
The Bible presents the One True God in His three persons.

>>>I do NOT understand how you can say that Mormons believe in a “different” Jesus Christ, when there is only ONE, and there has NEVER been another. He took all our sins upon Him, atoning for each of us who ever lived, are living and ever will live.<<<

First, I did not say “mormons believe in a different Chist.”
I said MORMONISM teaches about a different Christ. I have
no idea what individual mormons believe. God does.

>>>Demons may believe, but they have no bodies and therefore, will not benefit from Christ’s atonement.<<<

And that is just the point. Demons “believe” and “tremble”
but it does them no good. Faith is different than belief
and faith is only as good as the object it is place in.

>>>Did someone tell you that Mormons don’t believe in the Bible? Some of the most beautiful Scriptural Beliefs are contained in the Bible, both the Old Testament, and the New. I will never discount Scriptures from any source, including the Dead Sea Scrolls. <<<

Yes, mormonism followers.
The Dead Sea Scrolls are the Hebrew Scriptures.

“Or anything found since then. I will continue to keep an open mind, as I feel that Revelation has many sources.”

You sound as if you might also like Unitarianism.

>>>So, if I tell you I believe in the only True Savior, Jesus Christ, doesn’t that make me a Christian? If not, please enlighten me, as I may have been praying to a Lord who does not exist. <<<

FRiend, it has nothing to do with me. I’m just a begger telling
other beggers where to find bread. Eternal Bread.

Perhaps you could tell me about the “True Savior, Jesus Christ” you believe in? Then I may be more informed to answer the questions you ask me.

best,
ampu

PJ-””The sense I was given growing up was that things had gone badly after Vatican II, but that was a recent phenomenon.””

Dear friend,even Vatican II was twisted by liberal Bishops and clergy here in the US because they wanted to do their own thing.

Here is just one example,there are many others...

Vatican II said that Latin must be retained in the Mass and even ordered it,but the liberal clergy ignored it.

Here is some excerpts of what Vatican II actually says

Article 36. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters. These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language. Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above.

Article 54. In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be alloted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to readings and the “common prayer,” but also, as local condition may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this constitution. Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them. And whenever a more extended use of the mother tongue within the Mass appears desirable, the regulation laid down in Art. 40 of this constitution is to be observed.

Article 63. Because the use of the mother tongue in the administration of the sacraments and sacramentals can often be of considerable help to the people, this use is to be extended according to the following norms: a) The vernacular language may be used in administering the sacraments and sacramentals, according to the norm of Art. 36. b) In harmony with the new edition of the Roman Ritual, particular rituals shall be prepared without delay by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22 of this constitution. These rituals, which are to be adapted, also as regards the language employed, to the needs of the different regions, are to be reviewed by the Apostolic See and then introduced into the regions for which they have been prepared. But in drawing up these rituals or particular collections of rites, the instructions prefixed to the individual rites on the Roman Ritual, whether they be pastoral and rubrical or whether they have special social import, shall not be omitted.

Article 101. In accordance with the centuries-old tradition of the Latin rite, the Latin language is to be retained by clerics in the divine office. But in individual cases the ordinary has the power of granting the use of the vernacular translation to those clerics for whom the use of Latin constitutes a grave obstacle to their praying the office properly.

It's getting late.

I wish you a Blessed evening

Your questions leave me baffled. How can there be more than one Jesus Christ? There isn’t. He is the Jesus Christ the Bible speaks of, and there are no others. Period.

I have no clue where you got your ideas on “Mormonism,” but wherever it was, it is totally skewed. There is only one God. He has only ONE Begotten Son, who is Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world.

OK. I can see in all your posts that you are concerned with “Mormonism.” There really is no such thing. We don’t worship Mormon. We worship God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. We believe in the Holy Ghost.

“Mormons” belong to the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints. (Jesus Christ being the operative phrase!)

I believe that the Bible is Scripture; that, as a logical-thinking person, there are many “Scriptures” that have not been given validity, but are still true, and that there are many Scriptures yet to come, which are also true.

Remember that there are twelve Tribes of Israel and each of them has a record of their history, which is what the Bible is: An historical record, containing prophecies as well as historical and greographical information that is for the benefit of all the world, not just a select few. Each Tribe has it’s OWN history, written down, to be revealed at a later time. It stands to reason that if one Tribe (The Tribe of Judah) has a written history, the other Tribes will also have a written history.

And if the Dead Sea Scrolls are written in Hebrew, what of it? Isn’t that what the Bible (and therefore the Torah) are written in? Yet, you believe the Bible. Do you believe the Old Testament as well as the New?

Who is to say which is accurate? How many translations must be made and “verified” before we can “believe” them?

Unitarianism has nothing to offer me. I’ve studied religions searching for the truth, and attended many different services. None could answer my questions with logic.

I believe that you are truly curious, and because of that, I’ve tried not to be argumentative. If you have more questions, please feel free to ask them!

>>>Your questions leave me baffled. How can there be more than one Jesus Christ? There isn’t. He is the Jesus Christ the Bible speaks of, and there are no others. Period.

Oh, there is just one REAL Jesus Christ. There are countless
false Christs, as I posted earlier. Rev. Sun Myung Moon,
for instance claimed he was Christ. Clearly, he couldn’t be
the REAL Christ, right?? Consequently, he must be a false
Christ. Same with any cult or heresy - mormonism is one of
those.

>>>OK. I can see in all your posts that you are concerned with “Mormonism.” There really is no such thing. We don’t worship Mormon. We worship God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. We believe in the Holy Ghost.

My posts are focused on mormonism - the teachings of the
LDS. I can only wish there was no such thing. The God
mormonism worships is not the God identified in the Bible.
Nor is the Christ. Nor is the Holy Spirit. Individual
mormons can certainly come to know the REAL Christ - though
the teachings of the LDS obscure Him.

>>>“Mormons” belong to the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints. (Jesus Christ being the operative phrase!)

yes, but the issue is, which Christ? The answer is not
the One the Bible teaches.

>>>Remember that there are twelve Tribes of Israel and each of them has a record of their history, which is what the Bible is: An historical record, containing prophecies as well as historical and greographical information that is for the benefit of all the world, not just a select few. Each Tribe has it’s OWN history, written down, to be revealed at a later time. It stands to reason that if one Tribe (The Tribe of Judah) has a written history, the other Tribes will also have a written history.

No. The Hebrew Scriptures follow the Tribe of Judah because
the promised Messiah came from the lineage of Judah only.
No where in the Bible (that I know of) does it say every tribe
of Israel has its own written history that is to be revealed
in the future. That is simply part of the falsehood of
mormonism. If you can point me to such a passage in the
OT or NT, I’d appreciate your effort.

>>>Do you believe the Old Testament as well as the New?

Of course, I’m a Christian.

>>>Unitarianism has nothing to offer me. I’ve studied religions searching for the truth, and attended many different services. None could answer my questions with logic.

Unitarianism has a LOT in common with mormonism. Mormonism
itself is not logical. It is a belief system outside
logic.

>>>I believe that you are truly curious, and because of that, I’ve tried not to be argumentative. If you have more questions, please feel free to ask them!

Oh, I’m very curious. I find mormonism very curious indeed!
In fact, I’ve studied many cults, in addition to studying
the Scriptures for many years. As a complement, I believe
mormonism is the ultimate heresy/cult - the highest form
of the art.

As to mormons themselves, I like them and wish for them
to know the One True God and His Son Jesus Christ.

best,
ampu

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.