What Is The Great And Abominable Church?

[alter idem]

alter idem,

So Nephi is saying that those who baptize infants, like Catholic priests, are serving the devil.

As a Catholic, Mormon scripture sounds offensive to me ...

To clarify, Nephi said nothing about infant baptism. In answer to your question; are those who teach that little children need to be baptized or they are going to hell-- "serving the devil"? My opinion is Yes; they are in essence "serving the devil" because they are preaching a doctrine which denies the power of the atonement of Christ. This is what I believe Christ was talking of when he spoke of abominable creeds to Joseph Smith. Any time we preach doctrines which undermine the atonement, we are helping Satan to destroy faith, hope and the saving power of Christ's sacrifice to save God's children.

Personally, I don't care if you or anyone is offended by the LDS doctrine of salvation of children. I am just as offended that any one would teach that billions of little children are doomed to hell because they did not have a formal baptism.

[alter idem]

What you seem to be saying here is that rural Mormon communities are subject to cultural and intellectual inbreeding. I think there are those who would take exception to such a charcterization.

The area of the Salt Lake Valley where I now live was highly rural when I grew up there. I don't recall it having been taught to me in formal Church instruction that Catholicism is the church of the devil. I have never believed that, even when I was young.

I said nothing about cultural or intellectual inbreeding, so don't attribute that attitude to me, please.

Scott, your experiences, just like mine and Catholicgirl's, are all anectdotal. You may have never heard this taught and you may not know anyone who ever believed it, however, that doesn't mean others have had the same experience. Elder McConkie was very prominent in the church and his authoritative statements, like Joseph Fielding Smith's carried a lot of weight with the members 30 years ago. I think it's great that the members of the church are moving away from many of the things taught in "McConkie Doctrine" but in defense of Catholicgirl, I'm certain if I polled some of my old guard LDS relatives (those in their 70's and 80's), I could find at least a couple who would say that the GAAC is the RCC.

It may also be that oftentimes, many people who have left the church judge it by the memories of earlier times and they don't realize that the church has not been static while they've been away. It seems to be quite common that those on the board who left the church years ago, only remember what was taught to them while they were active(and their memories are mostly the negative things they experienced). I have to wonder if Catholicgirl were to poll her active relatives now, she might be surprised to find that some have changed their position on this subject.

[Catholic Girl]

I have to wonder if Catholicgirl were to poll her active relatives now, she might be surprised to find that some have changed their position on this subject.

Errrr, yeah. It's not like I heard these things 30 years ago from my in-laws. We've only been married for 11!

We are talking about hearing the Roman Catholic Church as the "Church of the Devil" and "Great Abominable Church" from my in-laws easily with the last 5 years. And due to my husband's fairly recent CATHOLIC conversion, we are not on speaking terms anymore.

[alter idem]

Errrr, yeah. It's not like I heard these things 30 years ago from my in-laws. We've only been married for 11!

We are talking about hearing the Roman Catholic Church as the "Church of the Devil" and "Great Abominable Church" from my in-laws easily with the last 5 years. And due to my husband's fairly recent CATHOLIC conversion, we are not on speaking terms anymore.

What can I say? Your in-laws are misinformed and you might want to take what they tell you about LDS doctrine with a grain of salt. If you want to know how they came to this erroneous conclusion, I would suggest you read this short article that Scott already provided a link for (which I'll provide once again because it is very informative).

http://www.mormonfortress.com/ga.html

Maybe when you are on speaking terms again you can set them straight.

[awyatt]

As a Catholic, Mormon scripture sounds offensive to me ...

Johnny, Johnny, Johnny...

Methinks you offend too easily. Mormons and Catholics differ on the efficacy of infant baptism, but why should you be offended by that? Should I be offended because Catholics officially believe that baptism in the Mormon Church has no salvific power? Should I be offended because Baptists believe Mormons are going to hell? Should I be offended for any of a hundred other differences that might be cited?

I choose not to be offended. Why do you choose to be?

-Allen

[LightBringer]

What can I say? Your in-laws are misinformed and you might want to take what they tell you about LDS doctrine with a grain of salt. If you want to know how they came to this erroneous conclusion, I would suggest you read this short article that Scott already provided a link for (which I'll provide once again because it is very informative).

http://www.mormonfortress.com/ga.html

Maybe when you are on speaking terms again you can set them straight.

In this day of political correctness, it would be suicide for General Authorities to declare the Catholic Church the Great and Abominable Church of Satan. One has to realize this, it wouldn't be wise. Read the scriptures for yourself and draw your own conclusions, there's no need for them to tell you what you could learn by reading a couple pages in the book of Mormon. However you want to interpret it, is up to you. My interpretation being different from others will have no effect on our salvation.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth agood fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

[2 paragraphs deleted. LB, we do not allow the bashing of other religions here. If you are going to post stuff like that, you better put a reliable source citation with it. ~mods]

In no way am I saying that the average Catholic is evil or anything like that. I'm saying the history of the leadership is being judged and not the intent of the average Catholic.

[RedSox]

I'm really surprised at the number who voted for the RCC. I thought Pres. McKay cleared that up, with BRM.

I had a religious prof. who believed it was actually in reference to the Roman Empire, although I can't remember the ins and outs of his argument.

[blueadept]

In this day of political correctness, it would be suicide for General Authorities to declare the Catholic Church the Great and Abominable Church of Satan. One has to realize this, it wouldn't be wise. Read the scriptures for yourself and draw your own conclusions, there's no need for them to tell you what you could learn by reading a couple pages in the book of Mormon. However you want to interpret it, is up to you. My interpretation being different from others will have no effect on our salvation.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth agood fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

How do Catholics explain the Inquisition? Indulgences? How about this oath that the Jesuits (militia of the Pope) took?

Just as Mormon apologists explains my issues with Joseph Smith, BoM, First Vision, etc., Catholics should come to terms with the issues you've listed as well (I'm not familiar with your last one) as well as the infant baptism issue, pedophile issues, etc. If I told you that in the grand scheme of things the Inquisitions saved lives (even if it was a 'big' black mark on our history) which JPII had referenced after much study, would that help you? During the Crusades when the troops got carried away and sacked a friendly city, Constanople (sp), the Pope ex-communicated all of them. Would that help? Members of other faiths should figure out their own church's demons before criticizing other's.

The answers are out there. In my particular case, I'm at peace with the issues others have with the Catholic Church. I come here to appreciate my wife's view of her faith.

[RedSox]

What was the oath the Jesuits made to the Pope?

I'm rather fond of Jesuits, but I've not heard the specifics of this oath.

[Outshined]

Members of other faiths should figure out their own church's demons before criticizing other's.

No kidding...

[Scott Lloyd]

I said nothing about cultural or intellectual inbreeding, so don't attribute that attitude to me, please.

Scott, your experiences, just like mine and Catholicgirl's, are all anectdotal. You may have never heard this taught and you may not know anyone who ever believed it, however, that doesn't mean others have had the same experience. Elder McConkie was very prominent in the church and his authoritative statements, like Joseph Fielding Smith's carried a lot of weight with the members 30 years ago. I think it's great that the members of the church are moving away from many of the things taught in "McConkie Doctrine" but in defense of Catholicgirl, I'm certain if I polled some of my old guard LDS relatives (those in their 70's and 80's), I could find at least a couple who would say that the GAAC is the RCC.

It may also be that oftentimes, many people who have left the church judge it by the memories of earlier times and they don't realize that the church has not been static while they've been away. It seems to be quite common that those on the board who left the church years ago, only remember what was taught to them while they were active(and their memories are mostly the negative things they experienced). I have to wonder if Catholicgirl were to poll her active relatives now, she might be surprised to find that some have changed their position on this subject.

You make some good points here, alteridem.

I recognize that my experiences are anecdotal. I raised my recent classroom experience in response to Catholic Girl's testimony about her in-laws. I did it mostly to show how easily anecodotal evidence can be countered and that it therefore doesn't carry much weight.

[Scott Lloyd]

Errrr, yeah. It's not like I heard these things 30 years ago from my in-laws. We've only been married for 11!

We are talking about hearing the Roman Catholic Church as the "Church of the Devil" and "Great Abominable Church" from my in-laws easily with the last 5 years. And due to my husband's fairly recent CATHOLIC conversion, we are not on speaking terms anymore.

Then I think the clouds are beginning to part here.

Could it be your in-laws' alleged comments about the Catholic Church are more attributable to their being peeved about recent events in their own family than to any rampant teaching in Mormonism?

[St Veronica]

[it has been deleted. Feel free to use the "report" button to report posts that are blatently false about other religions - we see it done often enough to use and will not allow it to happen to other religions on our board. ~mods]

This section from Lightbringer's posts is an untruth. I assume they picked it up from some anti-Catholic website.

SV

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm really surprised at the number who voted for the RCC. I thought Pres. McKay cleared that up, with BRM.

I rather suspect that at least a few people ignored the directive that voting in the poll be limited to believing, active, observant Latter-day Saints. Which speaks to why I don't put much stock in Internet message board polls, even ones that I start.

[Pahoran]

[This portion of LB's post has been deleted. Feel free to use the "report" false about other religions - we see it done often enough to use and will not allow it to happen to other religions on our board. ~mods button to report posts that are blatently]

In no way am I saying that the average Catholic is evil or anything like that. I'm saying the history of the leadership is being judged and not the intent of the average Catholic.

Lightbringer, what is your source for that oath? Where is it documented? I haven't researched the issue, so I can't speak from a position of knowledge here, but it just doesn't look credible to me.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Scott Lloyd]

Lightbringer, what is your source for that oath? Where is it documented? I haven't researched the issue, so I can't speak from a position of knowledge here, but it just doesn't look credible to me.

Regards,

Pahoran

It does seem like "DaVinci Code" type stuff.

[Outshined]

Lightbringer, what is your source for that oath? Where is it documented? I haven't researched the issue, so I can't speak from a position of knowledge here, but it just doesn't look credible to me.

Regards,

Pahoran

I did a quick google search and found it just as he quoted it, but that doesn't mean much. Look how much LDS stuff is misrepresented all over the web...

[grego]

Vate, vate, chocolate...

I've heard the CC = GAC. More than once. Outside of the Mormon Belt.

I especially heard it in Italy, from former Catholics. Maybe BRM struck a chord with them?

That's also a clue or two there... Not that the CC = GAC, but about how someone feels about coming to a true understanding about the .

I've talked with some padri, monsignori, and an atheist who knew a "big" leader well. I've heard quite a few stories (first-hand and second-hand) about black masses, tunnels, etc. and heard more. I've had people fall down and make the sign of the cross at me (and around noontime, too!). I've also had some really good discussions.

When you're especially talking about a political as well as a religious institution, with different factions, that's been around for 2,000 years or so, there's a lot to talk about.

Was a part/ were parts of the CC, or members of the CC, that formed/ matched members of the GAC? Yes. Officially? I doubt it.

I don't belive the CC = GAC, and especially not the members. I agree that anyone who misunderstands the Atonement is in danger of going to hell--no matter which religion, belief, or creed. There, in hell, they will have the opportunity to understand it (for the first time, or better). It's not that someone is bad and evil for believing a false doctrine--I'd say in this life we all come short of truth, to some extent--it's they don't understand the Atonement enough to have it fully effective for them; and if that's the case, how can they not go to hell? Do I see someone of another faith as being evil? Only inasmuch as they reject truth, especially when accompanied by the Holy Ghost. But I've seen enough of that without having to look "outside" so much.

I believe in the major world secret combination theory, and I believe Italy/ hers does play a (big) part in that.

[blueadept]

Then I think the clouds are beginning to part here.

Could it be your in-laws' alleged comments about the Catholic Church are more attributable to their being peeved about recent events in their own family than to any rampant teaching in Mormonism?

I'm sure for each person who leaves a particular faith, the reasons vary significantly and the reasons a persons family cuts the lines of communications is also different.

In my dad's conversion of LDS to Catholicism, he told me it was because his thoughts of God and the nature of God fell in line with the RCC more than the LDS. His comments about particular sacred LDS things gave me the impression he had an axe to grind though.

In talking to my wife why my LDS family wouldn't treat him well is because they felt he grew up with the truth but then left it. I didn't fully believe this idea either.

For myself, I have a skewed viewpoint of Mormons because of my related family. The "Families are Forever" slogan is almost laughable because of my family history. Going back 2 generations and looking at marriages of direct LDS relatives, one uncle is on his second marriage and everyone else is on their 3rd or more marriage with a ringer of a great uncle working on marriage #18. A lot of these are temple marriages. Comparing this to my moms side of the family, I only have one aunt that's remarried and that's because the 1st husband died. So I have a skewed look when I analyze the Catholic and LDS members of my family.

IMO, when family members decide to disown their faith that they grew up with (especially in the LDS church) it's a major strain on those who remain faithful LDS do not always handle things in the best Christ-like manner.

Peace

[Outshined]

I've heard the CC = GAC. More than once. Outside of the Mormon Belt.

Same here; I live in the South, so I've heard it a lot from EV churches. They also say the pope is the anti-Christ.

[RedSox]

I wrote a paper on the dissolutin of the Society of Jesus in the mid 18th Century. I never heard or saw anything like this, although I'm an English-only speaker, so I couldn't read if it was in Latin.

[cinepro]

I rather suspect that at least a few people ignored the directive that voting in the poll be limited to believing, active, observant Latter-day Saints.

You twice specified "current, active" members as being the target for the poll. If you wish to place further limits on participants, you need to be more specific.

And if you say "believing", you need to be specific about what they need to believe to qualify. Divinity of Jesus Christ? Historicity of the Book of Mormon? Single Hill Cumorah? Worldwide Flood? No Pre-Adamites?

[alter idem]

Cinepro, you make a good point. I think he's looking for answers from members who pay a full tithe and hold a calling--besides just attending church. That might narrow it down to the audience he wanted to poll.

[Calm]

Does 10% or thereabouts of membership thinking this indicate that this is a "widely held" or "widely taught" doctrine?

I can understand that an idea might be prevalent within a family where a teaching by parents is shared among several siblings and anyone who finds out that it is incorrect may be reluctant to teach against their parents or grandparents' beliefs.

And while I have never personally heard CC=GAA/CotD taught, I would not be surprised if it popped up now and again like other false doctrines do among well-intentioned, but misinformed members.

However, this does not mean it is Church doctrine or "widely held" or "widely taught".

What can be demonstrated and has is that it is against church doctrine, that this rejection is intended to be widely taught and widely held because it is in the basic Church manual as well as the rejection of this false doctrine being published from time to time in the Ensign.

=====

As to those teaching false doctrine being thrust down to hell---this is going to occur to anyone who refuses to accept the saving grace of the Atonement, but I think the scriptures make it clear that it is in particular to those who corrupt the teachings, IOW, not those who innocently teach false doctrine passed on to them, but those who knowingly changed them from truth to falsehoods. If there have been Catholic leaders who have done this, they will be required to repent of it so they can accept the Atonement. Same goes for LDS leaders and any other individual who has knowingly lied and corrupted the teachings of God.

Those who are their victims will be judged by their knowledge of the truth and not held accountable for the false teachings of their parents or leaders. The scriptures are clear on this.

====

Church of the Devil

Nephi 22: 23 For the time speedily shall come that all churches which are built up to get gain, and all those who are built up to get power over the flesh, and those who are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world, and those who seek the lusts of the flesh and the things of the world, and to do all manner of iniquity; yea, in fine, all those who belong to the kingdom of the devil

Was the Catholic Church built up and maintained for the purpose to:

1) Get Gain

2) Get Power over the flesh (I believe this means control others)

3) Become Popular

4) Seek lusts of the flesh and things of the world

5) Do all manner of iniquity

While there might have been some leaders that joined the movement to achieve this (LDS have John C Bennett--these type of men are everywhere trying to corrupt that which is good), I don't see it as the motivation of the early Church leadership in gneral or the leadership now.

Nephi 14: 11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

Does the Catholic Church "have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people"?

Since there are many countries where not only does the Catholic Church not have dominion, but is persecuted by those that do have dominion, I just don't see how someone who is appealing to the scriptures can justify any conclusion that the CC is the GAA or ever was. It has never held dominion over the entire earth.

If you want to wear the label so badly that you reject actual LDS teaching and chose mistaken, false and corrupted teaching instead, you should ask yourself why it is so important to you. But that's your issue, not the LDS church's.

[Scott Lloyd]

You twice specified "current, active" members as being the target for the poll. If you wish to place further limits on participants, you need to be more specific.

And if you say "believing", you need to be specific about what they need to believe to qualify. Divinity of Jesus Christ? Historicity of the Book of Mormon? Single Hill Cumorah? Worldwide Flood? No Pre-Adamites?

Such ludicrous hair splitting is the reason these message board polls will never be very enlightening.