Elder Bruce R. Mc Conkie

[soren]

I think you are being too harsh on Elder McConkie. He was only bringing to light some of the things the Catholic church has done including the Popes. You may say what you want about him but I do not think Elder McConkie ever put a dead person on trial such as Pope Stephen VI did. Or he fathered illegitimate children or commit adultery as Pope Alexander VI. Its not like Brother Mconkie had a greed for power or a history of is littered with the blood of martyrs, nor did he sell indulgences, was involved in political or worldly overthrows. I cant remember Brother McConkie scheming to plot and kill or arresting all the Knights Templar under trumped up charges of sodomy and blasphemy.

Sorry I usually don't get this riled up but its so easy for our critics to slam our church, our beliefs or our leaders and then be so defensive about their own religion. I seem to catch a glimpse of a double standard. Just my opinion I could be wrong.

I was in fact on the brink of mentioning some nefarious actions by popes in my earlier response to jwhitlock, and indeed almost mentioned the “cadaver synod” that you brought up. I am perfectly willing to shine a light on the sins of any pope. I think the Catholic Church has been lucky in the last 200 years to have pretty decent, holy men as popes all around. Certainly history shows there is no guarantee of such things. When Popes stand in judgment before God, they are judged with the rest of us, and probably by a higher standard, since they receive more blessing in life for which they are responsible. In fact I am seriously of the opinion that the Protestant Reformation was a just scourge sent by God in retribution for the sins of popes in the Renaissance.

You cannot accuse me of a double standard if you don’t know what my standard is for judging in my own house.

I understand your opinion but I can understand soren shooting from the hip. Some catholics (those in the know) are highly sensitive about the first edition of mormon doctrine. But what they don't understand is that the lds church distanced themselves from Elder McConkie's comments. And I do remember at the age of 18 (many, many years ago) studying the book of mormon in Institute and it was implied that the catholic church was the abominable church. And it all came from mormon doctrine.

I am not complaining that McConkie taught that the Catholic Church was the great and abominable Church. I am complaining that he used falsehood to promote his thesis. McConkie, (whose Mormon Doctrine has been endorsed by general authorities including Pres. Hinckley even if he was not yet an apostle at the time of writing) stands prominently in a long line of LDS teachers who have practiced deception in their presentation of Catholic teachings in order to attack them, using carefully chosen words to create a confusing picture of what we believe in order to dismiss it. (To give just one unambiguous example, he claimed we believe God is a non-being.) Coming from an educated person who should know better, that kind of behavior deserves nothing but a stern rebuke.

No matter how much the LDS Church trumpets its claim to respecting other religions, I will not believe it until its leaders cease to use falsehoods about our teachings and history in order to propagate its own agenda. I could document infractions far more recent than McConkie. My claims here might sound wild and confusing to Mormons who are themselves unfamiliar with or confused my beliefs and who see no reason to suspect that their authorities give them misinformation about them. But to eyes of this Catholic, who can distinguish correct Catholic teaching from the presentation it gets in both official and unofficial Mormon teaching, the fact is so glaring and obvious, that it should hardly need defense.

I just think that soren gave an emotional reaction to Elder McConkie. I give him or her pardon.

I did not speak emotionally, but spoke my sober judgment, what I believe when I am in a state of complete calm, in the quietude of my mind.

[Rommelator]

I'll read the Book of Mormon prayerfully when I am convinced I need to because of an apostasy and not before.

Why? What is holding you back? It is only a book. If it is false (and I testify that it is not), then no big deal. If it is true, then would you be sad that you had waited so long?

Why do you need to be convinced before you read it? I have read Catholic materials before I was convinced (and, FYI, I still remain unconvinced) that there was not an apostasy.

[jwhitlock]

I am not complaining that McConkie taught that the Catholic Church was the great and abominable Church. I am complaining that he used falsehood to promote his thesis. McConkie, (whose Mormon Doctrine has been endorsed by general authorities including Pres. Hinckley even if he was not yet an apostle at the time of writing) stands prominently in a long line of LDS teachers who have practiced deception in their presentation of Catholic teachings in order to attack them, using carefully chosen words to create a confusing picture of what we believe in order to dismiss it. (To give just one unambiguous example, he claimed we believe God is a non-being.) Coming from an educated person who should know better, that kind of behavior deserves nothing but a stern rebuke.

Well, why don't you discuss some of the claimed falsehoods more specifically, instead of engaging in a character attack.

You can start with a CFR for the "non-being" reference and tell us why it's a misrepresentation.

[Daniel Peterson]

I am not complaining that McConkie taught that the Catholic Church was the great and abominable Church. I am complaining that he used falsehood to promote his thesis.

You seem to believe that, if he did so, he did so deliberately.

I know of nothing to support such an allegation.

McConkie, (whose Mormon Doctrine has been endorsed by general authorities including Pres. Hinckley even if he was not yet an apostle at the time of writing)

The first edition of Mormon Doctrine was famously subjected to heavy criticism by the General Authorities, in part precisely because of its sentiments about the Roman Catholic Church, and the second edition was substantially revised.

a long line of LDS teachers who have practiced deception in their presentation of Catholic teachings

I believe this to be a false and slanderous accusation.

No matter how much the LDS Church trumpets its claim to respecting other religions, I will not believe it until its leaders cease to use falsehoods about our teachings and history in order to propagate its own agenda.

You should set the pattern by ceasing to use falsehoods to condemn the Church of Jesus Christ.

I did not speak emotionally, but spoke my sober judgment, what I believe when I am in a state of complete calm, in the quietude of my mind.

Then I repeat my condemnation of what you said as an uncharitable and unchristian example of false witness that leads me to think far less of you than I did before.

[3DOP]

Why? What is holding you back? It is only a book. If it is false (and I testify that it is not), then no big deal. If it is true, then would you be sad that you had waited so long?

Why do you need to be convinced before you read it? I have read Catholic materials before I was convinced (and, FYI, I still remain unconvinced) that there was not an apostasy.

Hey Rommelator...

Thanks so much for the kindly expressed invitation. I appreciate your thinking. But I am Catholic. Without an apostasy, I'm not personally curious about the Book of Mormon. I would like to read so much that I haven't read, and one of the first rules on my decision to read a particular book is that it attract me in some respect that so far hasn't happened with the BOM. There are books that I have some responsibility to read. An apostasy would probably impose that responsibility.

3DOP

[CMZ]

Hey Rommelator...

Thanks so much for the kindly expressed invitation. I appreciate your thinking. But I am Catholic. Without an apostasy, I'm not personally curious about the Book of Mormon. I would like to read so much that I haven't read, and one of the first rules on my decision to read a particular book is that it attract me in some respect that so far hasn't happened with the BOM. There are books that I have some responsibility to read. An apostasy would probably impose that responsibility.

3DOP

Maybe read it for its claim that it stands next to the Bible in importance. This is not the same type of issue as someone telling you, "Hey, you should read The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People," and you saying, "I won't read it unless somebody convinces me I am not already effective." This is holy scripture we are talking about. Don't do it for me or for anyone else here. Do it for yourself (not that I'm going to be checking up on you).

Soren, you might be magnifying the whole Mormon vs. Catholic thing out of proportion. I don't go around thinking to myself, "I'm so glad I'm not Catholic. I'm so glad Elder McConkie taught me the truth about how bad the Catholic Church is." It's simply not an issue to me and I have great respect for the good the Catholic Church does. The apostasy is not as big of an issue as even some LDS make it out to be (though I'm not claiming it's a non-issue). There were elders on my mission who were hyper-concerned about gathering all the facts they could to prove that an apostasy occurred. Well, an obsession with such a thing is a negative mission. Likewise, you seem to be really clinging to a thing or two that a dead guy said a long time ago that was largely his own individual view and which I believe he largely tempered as he progressed in life. I did some stupid things as a teenager and I don't want to act like I didn't do them but at the same time I don't want somebody hanging them over my head forever.

Did you catch President Hinckley expressing his sorrow over the death of Pope John Paul II?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Yes I did...I carry that talk with me all the time. I have the ending memorized. My Mother who is not a member heard the audio of it years ago a proclaimed..."That is a mighty man of God". Although I too have had my differences with some things he taught, I believe with all my heart that he was a â??special witnessâ? and knew the Savior intimately.

[Obiwan]

I think most people who vigorously oppose the Catholic Church really believe the exaggerated stories that usually center around a handful of bad popes.

1. I have found "few" to actually be exaggerated. And as someone who is well familiar with how anti's and liberals "exaggerate" facts and truth, I think I'm a pretty good at judging this.

2. I have found there to have been a LOT more than just a "handful", more than half even were at the very least oft unrighteous and many outright wicked.

[3DOP]

1. I have found "few" to actually be exaggerated. And as someone who is well familiar with how anti's and liberals "exaggerate" facts and truth, I think I'm a pretty good at judging this.

2. I have found there to have been a LOT more than just a "handful", more than half even were at the very least oft unrighteous and many outright wicked.

Hey Obiwan,

Thanks for noticing my comment. I'm really not disappointed that you so think, Obiwan. God love you.

3DOP

[saemo]

Offense, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, or which end of the words one is on.

I thought it was, "beauty is in the eye of the beer-holder". Wow. All these years.

[saemo]

ok then, after much reflection, my thoughts on Bruce McConkie:

Nothing has changed.

[why me]

I think that this is the testimony but I could be wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9NRh...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feJ-6...eature=related

Enjoy!!

[why me]

I thought that I would bump this up so those who never heard Bruce R. McConkie can hear him now. This is his last general conference talk and what the OP mentioned.