Jump to content
MiserereNobis

Pope Francis and President Nelson (and Catholic/Mormon history)

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, sjdawg said:

I think it is great that the leader of the largest Christian denomination in the world had time to greet the leader of a small, predominantly regional religion.

With more members outside the United States than inside, it is not “predominately regional.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

My understanding is that only President Ballard (I'm not exactly sure where he fits in the hierarchy) went with President Nelson. I'm sure entourage also included translators, cameras, etc.

Ahh, my mistake then.

Edited by CA Steve
To remove incorrect information.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, the narrator said:

Ha, thats totally funny.  Do you think there is some discomfort from the Vatican with Mormons coming to their city and building a temple and meeting with the Pope. 

I can't even find any articles on this Vatican News site about the visit.  I searched for "LDS", "Mormon", "Latter-day", "Latter", "Nelson".  Nothing that I could find at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Saying that it needs to be placed in proper perspective is not the same thing as “pretending that it was never taught.”

And dredging it up every chance one gets as a means to stir the pot is not keeping it in perspective. 

Scott, read my first post.  This is a discussion board.  It's just silly to post things indicating one cannot imagine why anyone ever believed this about the Catholic Church or thought that the minister in the temple movie was a Catholic Priest.  There are very definite reasons why members once believed this (about the Catholic Church) because there are teachings from some of our past leaders that were very specific.  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

My understanding is that only President Ballard (I'm not exactly sure where he fits in the hierarchy) went with President Nelson. I'm sure entourage also included translators, cameras, etc.

President Ballard is acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Dallin H. Oaks is president of the quorum but does not function in that role because he is first counselor in the First Presidency. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Scott, read my first post.  This is a discussion board.  It's just silly to post things indicating one cannot imagine why anyone ever believed this about the Catholic Church or thought that the minister in the temple movie was a Catholic Priest.  There are very definite reasons why members once believed this (about the Catholic Church) because there are teachings from some of our past leaders that were very specific.  

 

Yeah. Just silly to disapprove of pot stirring. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

With more members outside the United States than inside, it is not “predominately regional.”

We can disagree on this one.  Even within Canada and USA membership is mostly regional.  Alberta is Canada.  Utah, California, Idaho, Arizona, Nevada, and maybe Hawaii in the USA.  I'm not referring to total number of members necessarily but outside of these regions the scope of influence of the LDS church is significantly diminished. It goes from being a major force in the regional centers to becoming an after thought in most other areas.

Edited by sjdawg

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Ahh, my mistake then, & President Ballard would fit in the LDS hierarchy similar to where the Holy Father fits into the Catholic hierarchy.

Isn't President Nelson the equivalent of the Pope?

 

ETA: I see Scott gives some more clarification.

Edited by MiserereNobis

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Ha, thats totally funny.  Do you think there is some discomfort from the Vatican with Mormons coming to their city and building a temple and meeting with the Pope. 

I can't even find any articles on this Vatican News site about the visit.  I searched for "LDS", "Mormon", "Latter-day", "Latter", "Nelson".  Nothing that I could find at all.  

I don't think there is any discomfort. I think it just points to how small potatoes the LDS Church is. (Unless we are talking $$$. In that case the total assets of the LDS Church dwarfs that of the Catholic Church.)

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I don't see anyone who is "enraged".  Exaggerate much?

But I see no reason to pretend it was never taught by some past leaders and that there are still members who have these lingering memories of the teachings.   Similar teachings were taught by leaders regarding Christians in general.  It's best to just own it and be glad this is no longer taught.

I originally wrote "p***** off," but changed it before posting.  

Frankly, AL, I ended up putting the concept of enrage in there because I couldn't find any other appropriate term to describe the motivation for bringing it up in the first place.  I played with hyperjudgmental, tendentious, antiMormon, bigoted, and a couple others.  "Enraged" seemed to catch the right flavor.

Sorry if it annoys you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yeah. Just silly to disapprove of pot stirring. 

Did he bring the topic up?  I saw others discussing the minister in the temple first.

I agree with him that this was once a pretty embedded belief by members.  Thankfully most all younger members (and older now too) no longer believe it.  There’s just still some remnants of feelings I think but those are dwinling gratefully.

Of course this can go both ways.  I have a dear friend who was raised Catholic (baptized and her family is still very active).  When she joined the Mormon church, her Mother cried and told her she was going to hell and she would pray for her!

(She called us a man made religion not from God.  I’m sure not all Catholics feel as strongly about us but it’s an example of it going both ways.)

Edited by JulieM
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, USU78 said:

I originally wrote "p***** off," but changed it before posting.  

Frankly, AL, I ended up putting the concept of enrage in there because I couldn't find any other appropriate term to describe the motivation for bringing it up in the first place. 

But he didn’t bring up the topic of the minister in the temple.  He responded to other’s posts about it.

And, he’s accurate with what he stated.  Or do you disagree?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, the narrator said:

Unless we are talking $$$. In that case the total assets of the LDS Church dwarfs that of the Catholic Church.

You're serious here?  Do you have any notion of the scale of the real estate holdings of the RC, its dioceses, its parishes, and its subsidiary entities?  Even in the US, where the Church has just over 2.1% of the total population, the RC has membership more than 10 times that number, with real estate holdings to services that membership commensurate with that population.

Perhaps you were making a joke.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, JulieM said:

But he didn’t bring up the topic of the minister in the temple.  He responded to other’s posts about it.

And, he’s accurate with what he stated.  Or do you disagree?

I've stated my views on the court jester.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, the narrator said:

. (Unless we are talking $$$. In that case the total assets of the LDS Church dwarfs that of the Catholic Church.)

The mormon church has plenty of money but I don't think it is on the scope of the Catholic church.  

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Isn't President Nelson the equivalent of the Pope?

 

ETA: I see Scott gives some more clarification.

Scot is correct. My mind just blurred by the name Ballard and thought you were asking about President Nelson.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, USU78 said:

You're serious here?  Do you have any notion of the scale of the real estate holdings of the RC, its dioceses, its parishes, and its subsidiary entities?  Even in the US, where the Church has just over 2.1% of the total population, the RC has membership more than 10 times that number, with real estate holdings to services that membership commensurate with that population.

Perhaps you were making a joke.

Yeah. That struck me as pretty outlandish as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, USU78 said:

I originally wrote "p***** off," but changed it before posting.  

Frankly, AL, I ended up putting the concept of enrage in there because I couldn't find any other appropriate term to describe the motivation for bringing it up in the first place.  I played with hyperjudgmental, tendentious, antiMormon, bigoted, and a couple others.  "Enraged" seemed to catch the right flavor.

Sorry if it annoys you.

LOL.  I'm not the one who seems to be annoyed.

I just saw no one here who was "enraged".  I was just responding to comments about that topic.  If you can't handle the truth (which IS what I posted), then just ignore it.

Funny that you're only attacking me, but not disagreeing with anything I posted....

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, USU78 said:

You're serious here?  Do you have any notion of the scale of the real estate holdings of the RC, its dioceses, its parishes, and its subsidiary entities?  Even in the US, where the Church has just over 2.1% of the total population, the RC has membership more than 10 times that number, with real estate holdings to services that membership commensurate with that population.

Perhaps you were making a joke.

Yeah, I'm insulted that he thinks we don't have as much money as you guys ;) 

I wonder how much Vatican City is worth...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Did he bring the topic up?  I saw others discussing the minister in the temple first.

I agree with him that this was once a pretty embedded belief by members.  Thankfully most all younger members (and older now too) no longer believe it.  There’s just still some remnants of feelings I think but those are dwinling gratefully.

All true.  People are hypersensitive (apparently) about the history here.  But no one has posted anything that proves I've posted anything that is not true.

11 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Of course this can go both ways.  I have a dear friend who was raised Catholic (baptized and her family is still very active).  When she joined the Mormon church, her Mother cried and told her she was going to hell and she would pray for her!

(She called us a man made religion not from God.  I’m sure not all Catholics feel as strongly about us but it’s an example of it going both ways.)

I agree.  I know there have been strong feelings from both sides (and also with other religions).  I see most moving away from that, which is great to see.

Edited by ALarson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, JulieM said:

But he didn’t bring up the topic of the minister in the temple.  He responded to other’s posts about it.

And, he’s accurate with what he stated.  Or do you disagree?

Read his response.  He's got nothing :) 

(Just more personal attacks....)

Edited by ALarson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, ALarson said:

All true.  People are hypersensitive (apparently) about the history here.  But no one has posted anything that proves I've posted anything that is not true.

I agree.  I know there have been strong feelings from both sides (and also with other religions).  I see most moving away from that, which is great to see.

Yes.  I think us moving into more mainstream Christianity has helped a lot.  At least that’s what I feel is happening with many of the changes.  It’s a very positive move too!

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, the narrator said:

I don't think there is any discomfort. I think it just points to how small potatoes the LDS Church is

image.png.fcc9d5635a0594c7fb0581c0c371a0c0.png

I think this picture says it all about the relative significance of this meeting for each leader :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Read his response.  He's got nothing :) 

(Just more personal attacks....)

You've posted more than in this thread on this day on this discussion board, n'est-ce pas?  Are we to presume motiveless malignity, Iago?

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Yeah, I'm insulted that he thinks we don't have as much money as you guys ;) 

I wonder how much Vatican City is worth...

The real estate of the Vatican itself is only worth about $1 billion, not counting it's priceless art.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...