If you were not LDS....

[Calm]

Just went and took a tally of the first two pages of responses----

I got 9 who specified they'd go to another Christian church/faith (this does not include a couple who actually did so that could be seen as raising that number), 4 who said they'd remain Christian but not attend an organized church or attach to a specific faith community plus one that said he'd not belong, but would go along with what his family wanted...did not indicate if he would keep any Christian faith or not, 3 that would choose some form of Judaism, and last 3 that would choose to become agnostic.

Perhaps it is just that becoming agnostic is a shocker to some and so they pay more attention to those who state this position, thus artificially inflating its frequency.

In the next four pages, there was only one new input and that was would choose another Christian faith so I am assuming the rest of the thread is consistent with the first pages....and going to bed because if I don't the dog is going to have a mental breakdown over why I won't let her come slobber all over me.

[Sky]

PS: if one reads the first page or two, the majority of LDS who responded said they would either be either a different Christian denomination or remain a Christian but not belonging to anything organized, so I am not sure why there is this idea that the majority of LDS would become agnostic or athestic.

Atheism and agnosticism are not appealing or comforting to me in the slightest. If I were not LDS, I would genuinely want to remain a Christian. But it would be hard for me to accept only a part of the picture when I feel that I have the whole thing. In a worst case scenario, if I lost my faith in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, then I

[Libs]

If a person comes to the conclusion that the LDS faith is false, would it not be just as easy to conclude that other religions are also false?

What if, on the other hand, they are all true? At least, the essence. Isn't that what the LDS Church teaches? All religons worship the same God, only in different ways? So, perhaps, they're all true, to some degree. Or perhaps it's just that God is true and our various forms of worship and understanding all fall short.

[charity's child]

If I'd never heard of the church, I'd probably be Wiccan. I'd be a totally different person, though, and I don't think I'd like myself all that much.

[charity's child]

This is why (in my experience) many/most LDS who no longer believe in "things LDS" become atheist/agnostic.

Where as many (Catholics or any other denomination) who may no longer believe in "things Catholic/other denomination" remain Christian.

Peace,

Ceeboo

I think a different possibile reason that many LDS who leave the church become atheist is the level of truth. If you have part of the truth and walk away from it, it still leaves you open to accept the remainder of the truth (as in people of other Christian faiths who remain Christian after they leave their faith). But if you have the whole truth and walk away, what is left to embrace?

Just another perspective.

[Robspectre]

I would probably lean toward Catholicism if I was not already LDS. Being LDS and believing 100 percent that the "Church is True" creates a problem with me joining another Church. If this Church is not true there is no God. I have a strong testimony of the truthfulness of this Faith and cannot let go. If I did, I would doubt that my experiences were of God, and I would really question His existence. I would probably believe that all my experiences were some sort of self-delusion and have a really hard time coming to grips with any religion. To me, as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its all or nothing. I can't imagine being in this Church but not believing in it whole heartedly. Some may say that this is a personality disorder, but I believe that anything less that my all for Christ and His kingdom is the very definition of sin.

[blueadept]

Calmoriah,

I actually enjoyed your post and permit me to comment on some of your summations.

Summing up, I would say it is not that LDS are more prone to atheism, it is just that there are more limited perceived to be valid options due to the way the LDS Church views its relationships with other denominations as opposed to how the Catholic view theirs.

While I agree with this in general, I would tend to believe it deals with individuals who knew their previous faith very well and had what appeared be a true testimony. These tend to go adnostic or atheistic. My father would be an example of someone who was LDS and supposively understood his childhood faith but converted to Catholicism. Honestly, I'm not impressed by his working knowledge of Mormonism. If I want to know something LDS, I don't ask him. Just as I've met LDS missionaries who've converted to Catholicism, I'm not impressed with their knowledge of their previous faith.

My 2 cent opinion

I would also say your point of how Catholics view those who do leave their faith is significant as well, it appears to be not as much as an emotional break, it is not seen as life altering as it is in the LDS faith. If so, it seems like it becomes less important for the individual to construct significant rationales for leaving.

The stated opinion among the practicing Catholic religious is that they take the non-aggressive 'pray for them, leave it in God's hands and give them the free will space to do what they want' for those try to 'construct significant rationales for leaving.' Let them figure it out and the church will be there at the important times of their life as I've experienced through my Legion of Mary ministry that's an extention of who the priest helps.

While we all are called to evangelizing, I tend to view the LDS church as much more aggressive on this than Catholics even though I know a few aggressive Catholics. I know a lot more aggressive LDS members.

[saemo]

I think the main issue here is that the LDS paradigm is not echoed very well outside of the faith.

I am LDS because that is the faith that logically answers the question of how things should work in this world, it tells me why there is evil and how the Lord can love his children and yet withhold his help at times, it tells me why the Atonement works the way it does, it tells me what purpose there is in things that are meaningless by any other perspective. Whether you come to the faith because it fits your perceptions or your perceptions grow to fit your faith as you learn the doctrine and see how it is supposed to work in and with the world, in the end the LDS paradigm is a pretty all inclusive one in that it addresses something in every aspect of one's life (not saying others don't, but just saying why we end up looking for something to replace an entire worldview rather than just bits and pieces).

Perhaps a faith that can't see Jesus Christ as the all encompassing Truth isn't imparting much truth at all. HE is the Truth that never fails.

And while there are similarities of doctrine in other faiths, there is nothing close in similarity to the 'whole package' of answers so there is nowhere else really to go if one wants to shed only a few minor or major beliefs, but keep the overall structure of one's belief system (except perhaps the siblings of LDS Restoration, but those have been taught to have no authority and that is a hard hurdle to overcome, imo). So one is left looking for a whole new paradigm, not just a remodeled one. And if one is going to do that, anything is up for questioning, especially oneself so one has not only doubt, but suspicion about what one has held dear before, afraid to be betrayed again by what weakness led us to the original falsehood.

Yes, in this I see Mormons are being taught to be agnostic, and acting in the way in which they are taught.

There are also no real working role well known models out there showing LDS who lose faith their options outside of becoming agnostic. The most familiar exLDS Christians tend to be overly aggressive in their attacks on LDS so that option not something most LDS see as appealing. OTOH, Catholics have the whole Protestant collection of sects as role models, demonstrating that it is not an unlikely step to keep the faith even if one gives up the Catholic version of it. They have grown up accepting that there are other valid faiths to operate from, baptisms they accept as valid, etc. etc., something quite absent in the LDS faith though we believe other faiths can hold great truths. The paradigm of "One True Faith" is different for LDS than it is for Catholics, the latter seeing the Catholic faith as the center (please correct me if I am wrong) but not alone as there are seen valid brethren in the faith in many Christian denominations. Not so LDS, where the focus of "One True Faith" is more exclusive, we do not 'share' sacraments with others, all sacraments must be done by one authorized, authorization comes through the Church's hierarchy and only through that (ending and beginning with Christ as the head of the faith.)

The work of anti-mormons in the past has created a sense of division between the LDS faith and the general traditional Christian community, overemphasizing the differences, imo. The self-imposed, federal government fueled isolation of Utah also led to a greater sense of distance between the traditional Christian sects and the LDS Christian sect. This is an emotional barrier that needs to be conquered.

All of this is relying on people, not Christ. Adhere to HIM.

I would find it interesting if one could do a study of Catholics in the first few hundred years of the Church and see if most who left the Catholic Church remained Christian in some fashion or sought out something completely different. I would not be surprised if in the future as exLDS who are active in other faiths interact in positive ways grow in numbers (as opposed to those who become anti-mormon along with their new beliefs), that there are more LDS who chose this route if they choose to leave....though with the huge and aggressive presence of the secular world these days, that is a voice that can drown out

St. Paul speaks of this, when he addresses pagan converts who under times of trial and stress are tempted to pray or offer sacrifice to a god they had previously worshiped. It is natural to fall back on old beliefs, to even miss them, but he encourages them to remain steadfast in Christ.

People tend to do what they see others doing, they get their ideas on what is and what isn't appropriate from others as well.

Summing up, I would say it is not that LDS are more prone to atheism, it is just that there are more limited perceived to be valid options due to the way the LDS Church views its relationships with other denominations as opposed to how the Catholic view theirs.

It isn't the view of other churches, it is a view of Jesus Christ. One faith, one baptism, which faith is in Him.

I would also say your point of how Catholics view those who do leave their faith is significant as well, it appears to be not as much as an emotional break, it is not seen as life altering as it is in the LDS faith. If so, it seems like it becomes less important for the individual to construct significant rationales for leaving.

It is an emotional break, and it is life altering. Parents are heartbroken when their children leave, especially if it is for a non-Christian faith, or none at all. But they don't view their children as apostate, they view them as being led away. But there must always be left room for the Holy Spirit to work, and so it is, we see that God can and will lead them back. That He will never cease in calling to them, as He calls to all people. They may never return, but we understand there is nothing He desires more than their Salvation. So our faith is in God, and what He can do, which is evidenced by what He has done.

[blueadept]

I think a different possibile reason that many LDS who leave the church become atheist is the level of truth. If you have part of the truth and walk away from it, it still leaves you open to accept the remainder of the truth (as in people of other Christian faiths who remain Christian after they leave their faith). But if you have the whole truth and walk away, what is left to embrace?

Just another perspective.

I agree that one's working knowledge of their previous faith is a factor in what doors (choices) of where they may end up.

I give the typical LDS member a more working knowledge of their faith. The typical Catholic I've run across tend to be something else.

I was at an RCIA class recently (1st time this year as a sponsor) and the topic was on Mary and the Saints. After 20 minutes of every other Catholic saying we 'pray to' the saints and realizing the candidates didn't understand the difference between veneration and worship, I had to speak up and correct how it was being said. I KNOW that every Catholic in the room didn't 'worship' saints like Jesus, but I wasn't convinced the catecumens understood that since they all appeared to be joining because their spouse was already a Catholic. They weren't really questioning anything and simply going through the steps and I KNOW they were hearing something that wasn't intended.

Did I mention that I appreciate how Mormons learn their faith better than how Catholics get taught theirs at times??

...that may explain why I feel a pull to teaching middle schoolers their faith. I feel they are rather impressionable even if they have other issues at this age....

[saemo]

I would say it was less about turning their back on Christ and more about doubting themselves and looking for a way to avoid making the same type of mistake again (assuming that the LDS faith was a mistake). If one doubts oneself, even the most rational belief can be viewed as suspicious,

Yes, I understand this, as it was a struggle I faced in my conversion. I was very careful in how I prayed, because I don't trust how Mormons are taught to pray, especially about the BoM. (Seems to be the power of suggestion to me.)

My experience of that time is that God grabbed me and pulled me into Him, and He has never stopped. It was like a pounding that I couldn't ignore.

especially if the most vocal around you are saying it is....and there is always someone (in my experience) out there telling LDS that they've been making a big mistake and encouraging them to lose faith (even if that means losing faith in Christ...perhaps urroner mentioned this happening on ZLMB where several EVs celebrated a person turning her back on Christ because she was turning her back on the LDS faith at the same time).

This is unfortunate, and in my atheist years I would have been one of those celebrating people becoming atheist. I try to be more careful around LDS, because of this. Every religious conversation though seems to be construed as trying to "make people lose faith".

PS: if one reads the first page or two, the majority of LDS who responded said they would either be either a different Christian denomination or remain a Christian but not belonging to anything organized, so I am not sure why there is this idea that the majority of LDS would become agnostic or athestic.

Yes, and I was thinking about this last night after I made my last post, and again this morning. I have two views in this regard, one, my own experience of leaving Mormonism for atheism, so I can see that I am projecting my own experience onto others. Which, I apologize for.

The other view is one of conversion. I do in fact know more than a few Catholic converts who came straight from Mormonism, no atheist/agnostic stop in between. When these people (some who are dear friends) speak of their conversion, it is a conversion to Jesus Christ, the same as mine, and it is because of Jesus that they are now Catholic. They overwhelmingly never lost faith in Him, but rather were seeking to find Him. That is a better, hopeful outlook, and the one I'll remember from now on.

I also remember one woman who I worked for, years ago, who spoke in the way I see Catholics speak. That is, focused and committed to Jesus Christ. I have been thinking about her, because of this thread, and wondering if her commitment is to Jesus, or to the LDS organization. I don't really know, but I find it hard to believe that the things she said could be discarded, if she weren't ever LDS.

[Calm]

The stated opinion among the practicing Catholic religious is that they take the non-aggressive 'pray for them, leave it in God's hands and give them the free will space to do what they want' for those try to 'construct significant rationales for leaving.' Let them figure it out and the church will be there at the important times of their life as I've experienced through my Legion of Mary ministry that's an extention of who the priest helps.

While we all are called to evangelizing, I tend to view the LDS church as much more aggressive on this than Catholics even though I know a few aggressive Catholics. I know a lot more aggressive LDS members.

Most definitely. I think part of it comes from having all that history and all those faithful people through the centuries to connect to (religious envy on my part here). For LDS, the history is currently mainly a contentious one with the rest of the religious world, our martyrs are the grandparents of our grandparents, not so long ago (even the converts appear to identify as part of the 'extended family' in my experience). Our apostates not so long ago threatened the very existence of not only the Church, but the people in it. We have not yet reached the place where one individual is not able to make a significant (in terms of percentages) dent in our ability to function in certain areas (I am thinking for France and Germany where the actions of a few have caused an exodus and damaged the work of the Church for many years and even Calgary, Canada where one man's 'enlightenment' soured a whole community). I am not saying that Catholics don't sorrow for those who do become apostates and damage the faith of others, it's just that the sheer numbers involved don't make it as dramatic of a challenge to the existence of the community. The sorrow is more for the individuals and less for the Church itself.

When the martyrs we celebrate are mostly more than 500 years in our past, perhaps it won't set off as significant of an emotional reaction against those who caused them to suffer. In the past it would seem to me the Catholic aas a whole were quite aggressive, about their missionary work and about those who challenged the faith by leaving it for another, even those who shared almost every core doctrinal stance (such as the Eastern Orthodox). Over time, this has changed. They seem to celebrate their martyrs without needing to pay that much attention to the persecutors of the past. Perhaps it will change for LDS as well when the emotional distance of those difficult times that are an essential part of the Church's identity (as the Saints and Martyrs of the Catholic faith are as well) is great enough that the focus will be solely on those we celebrate leaving behind resentment or anger (and fear which is the core of each imo) or when the very presence of the faith is seen as almost enough to draw a person to it within the work of the Lord or perhaps the view of the lack of valid sacraments in other faiths, even those who share much the same essential doctrine, will prevent this from happening.

[Calm]

Perhaps a faith that can't see Jesus Christ as the all encompassing Truth isn't imparting much truth at all. HE is the Truth that never fails.

And the vast majority of LDS and exLDS (at least according to the projected numbers of this thread) would agree with you. The LDS faith has taught since Joseph Smith that:

"The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it."

If you are suggesting that the LDS faith in general does not teach this, it seems very strange to me after your time as LDS and after being on this board and reading our responses for so long. If you are talking about individuals' faith, that I can agree with. Not all LDS possess the faith that the LDS Church is intent on sharing. The Church is structured in such a way that we hope to bring not only nonmembers closer to the gospel, but our own members (I assume the same is true for the Catholic Church).

Yes, in this I see Mormons are being taught to be agnostic, and acting in the way in which they are taught.

and

It isn't the view of other churches, it is a view of Jesus Christ. One faith, one baptism, which faith is in Him.

And I think you are viewing a correlation as a causation.

I would suggest it is less that they are being taught and more that there is a lack of teaching of other alternatives. As I stated before, Catholics are taught or at least can observe that there are other valid options of worship of Christ, you yourself have said that it does not automatically impede one's journey toward Christ to leave the Catholic faith; it is a small step for them over to the Eastern Orthodox for example and even most of the Protestants are accepted as part of the extended Body of Christ (IIRC what I read in the Catechism, I couldn't find the reference so I may be phrasing this wrong, perhaps I should use the term "community of Christ") though of course the Catholic faith is seen as the one with the full truth and authority. The view of one faith may not be fundamentally about other churches, but it is a view that impacts the perception of these other churches. We also believe in one faith, one baptism of Christ. It just happens to reside in within the LDS faith. Again for us as well as you, this is a view of Jesus Christ, but the impact on our view of other faiths is that they are not of this one baptism (though individuals may be of the one faith). You are suggesting that it is the view of Christ that makes the difference, I would suggest that it is not...it is the view of other faiths and whether or not we believe we will find Christ in them as well as we once did in the LDS faith.

If it was the LDS view of Christ, then there would be a whole lot more of exLDS leaving the Christian faith altogether.

While LDS see value in other forms of worship and seeking out of the gospel of Christ, without the sacraments of our faith, eternal progression eventually grinds to a halt and we definitely focus on this availability and acceptance of these sacraments/ordinances as the ideal for everyone.

And nonLDS emphasizing differences rather than similarities contribute to the sense that leaving the Church will be an obstacle for future spiritual growth (I don't wholly subscribe to this, I believe Christ can teach wherever someone walks, the quality most needed is humility and openness to the Spirit, however eventually acceptance of the ordinances and principles of---what I believe to be---the Church of Jesus Christ is required to fully become one with the Lord and the sooner this happens for an individual, the better their life will be in most cases imo) so that even if one comes to a belief the LDS faith is false, there is still embedded in their baggage the idea of the lack of significant benefit of other faiths that needs to be overcome (and is apparently overcome by a majority according at least to this thread).

Does this mean that those LDS who are influenced by this view are allowing themselves to be influenced by men as opposed to the Spirit? Perhaps so, but is it not also possible that your view of the acceptability of leaving the Catholic faith for other valid forms of worship is just as much the result of being influenced by man's view and not the Spirit. If the LDS faith is correct, this would most likely be the case. That you see LDS as allowing men to influence their perception rather than Christ is a result, imo, of your belief that the Catholic faith is correct and the LDS faith is false.

All of this is relying on people, not Christ. Adhere to HIM.

Christ is revealed to individuals in part through other people. For example, the scriptures are the result of man's hand as well as God's, the voices of the Bible are the voices of Moses and the Prophets, of Matthew and Mark, of Paul and Peter. Would there not be some doubt in your soul if you found out the scriptures were false in some significant way? Would you not examine your concept of what Christ is and how he interacts with man to see where you might have been taught wrong, to see if the interpretation of your experience with the Divine was overly dependent on your beliefs, not the other way around?

St. Paul speaks of this, when he addresses pagan converts who under times of trial and stress are tempted to pray or offer sacrifice to a god they had previously worshiped. It is natural to fall back on old beliefs, to even miss them, but he encourages them to remain steadfast in Christ.

Cultures may change, but the natural man pretty much stays the same, a prey to self-doubt and the ease and comfort of habits.

It is an emotional break, and it is life altering. Parents are heartbroken when their children leave, especially if it is for a non-Christian faith, or none at all. But they don't view their children as apostate, they view them as being led away.

By whom? If not the Lord, don't you see this as a major problem?

But there must always be left room for the Holy Spirit to work

Not sure what you mean here, are you suggesting man has no choice in being able to hear the Spirit, that we always hear but may then reject? Or simply that the Spirit is always there for anyone reaching out for it in some way that we may not even recognize ourselves?

we see that God can and will lead them back. That He will never cease in calling to them, as He calls to all people. They may never return, but we understand there is nothing He desires more than their Salvation. So our faith is in God, and what He can do, which is evidenced by what He has done.

And this is how LDS see it, except that we also see that the baptismal covenant if not sustained by the individual becomes null and void so that while the Spirit is reaching out, struggling with man as stated in the Scriptures, the effect is likely perceived somewhat differently due to our different views of what baptism and possibly other sacraments can effect in an individual (again, this is not a view of Christ or a lack of faith in him as you seem to be suggesting, it is simply a different perception on how he chooses to work in individuals, perhaps we place a greater emphasis on the individual's agency and his ability to reject Christ if he so chooses...again not a lack of faith in Christ but rather a belief about mankind and man's role).

To be honest, the way you phrase things that present several of these concepts as if it were different for LDS when it is not is very confusing to me. For example, the LDS Church has always taught the doctrine of one faith, one baptism. And we have always taught that all have the Light of Christ within them and that the Lord desires nothing more than their Salvation...after all we teach that this is God's work, "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man". How much more clear can we be about this faith in God's mercy and longsuffering and hope for mankind?

So I would strongly suggest that it is not our view of Christ that leads us not to join other faiths (when this happens in the minority of times), but rather our view of those other faiths. That segment of the exLDS community seem to me to have a distaste for organized religion, but do not automatically deny Christ or the Spirit or at least that there is something Divine out there. Something more must take place for that to occur--for the step to be made for agnosticism---and I would also suggest if that "something more" occurred to an exCatholic, it is quite likely that he would become agnostic with the same frequency that LDS do.

[Calm]

While I agree with this in general, I would tend to believe it deals with individuals who knew their previous faith very well and had what appeared be a true testimony. These tend to go adnostic or atheistic. My father would be an example of someone who was LDS and supposively understood his childhood faith but converted to Catholicism. Honestly, I'm not impressed by his working knowledge of Mormonism. If I want to know something LDS, I don't ask him. Just as I've met LDS missionaries who've converted to Catholicism, I'm not impressed with their knowledge of their previous faith.

Do you see the same happening among Catholics or is it different and if so, why do you think it is? I know of several well educated in the faith Protestants joining the Catholic faith (it seems to me that the issue of authority is key here in their decision), not the reverse but that just could because I don't read as much Protestant material as Catholic.

PS: Thanks for the kind words.

[Calm]

I give the typical LDS member a more working knowledge of their faith....

Did I mention that I appreciate how Mormons learn their faith better than how Catholics get taught theirs at times??

Thank you. Since we often get criticized for quite the opposite, it is nice to know that someone whose opinion I trust sees it this way.

[Calm]

One more post and then I really must get into preparing the meal....

I have been thinking about her, because of this thread, and wondering if her commitment is to Jesus, or to the LDS organization. I don't really know, but I find it hard to believe that the things she said could be discarded, if she weren't ever LDS.

The vast majority of LDS I know and/or have spoke to about this are committed to the LDS organization because they are committed to Christ. We covenant to build up the Kingdom of God because we believe this is what he has commanded us to do and we believe the scripture that states "if ye love me, keep my commandments" and we believe the verse that follows shortly after that one: "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father

[blueadept]

Do you see the same happening among Catholics or is it different and if so, why do you think it is? I know of several well educated in the faith Protestants joining the Catholic faith (it seems to me that the issue of authority is key here in their decision), not the reverse but that just could because I don't read as much Protestant material as Catholic.

PS: Thanks for the kind words.

Honestly, I have to meet a few more knowledgeable Catholics that leave the faith before I can make the comparison that they tend to go agnostic or atheists. Every ex-Catholic I've met has blown a misunderstanding of the faith out of proportion and are convinced they properly understand the issue. I usually point towards their poor upbringing in understanding their faith even among those who attend Catholic schools growing up. It's common to see kids leave their faith the moment their not under their parents guidance or once they receive their confirmation. My opinion is that they didn't figure it out for themselves and are easy prey.

My experience with the recent RCIA class brings out the point. If any MADB member would have attended that class, they would have walked away with the perception that we put the saints on an even level as Jesus and would only think otherwise after my comments. That's why a gave LDS a high grade for teaching their youth and investigators while I give Catholics a much lower grade....oh well.

Some of the best teachers of the Catholic faith has been the bible thumpers that use to belong to other faiths. Obviously I have an opinion of why they've joined since I believe ......

My 2 cents

[Aka_me]

I would probably lean toward Catholicism if I was not already LDS. Being LDS and believing 100 percent that the "Church is True" creates a problem with me joining another Church. If this Church is not true there is no God. I have a strong testimony of the truthfulness of this Faith and cannot let go. If I did, I would doubt that my experiences were of God, and I would really question His existence. I would probably believe that all my experiences were some sort of self-delusion and have a really hard time coming to grips with any religion. To me, as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its all or nothing. I can't imagine being in this Church but not believing in it whole heartedly. Some may say that this is a personality disorder, but I believe that anything less that my all for Christ and His kingdom is the very definition of sin.

think for a minute, if you were living in 1800...

a time when God had not "restored" the church.

if, in 2010, God STILL hadn't restored the church...

it doesn't mean "there is NO God" it just means "there is no restored church"

the point of the thread is to imagine that God had not yet "restored" the church...

then what would you do?

[saemo]

And the vast majority of LDS and exLDS (at least according to the projected numbers of this thread) would agree with you. The LDS faith has taught since Joseph Smith that: If you are suggesting that the LDS faith in general does not teach this, it seems very strange to me after your time as LDS and after being on this board and reading our responses for so long.

I was LDS a long time ago, and I was atheist for much longer than I was LDS, or Catholic. I remember a lot about was I was taught but I don't remember ever having the love for God that I have now. Mainly, I don't understand people here. One thing is said one day and contradicted the next, and whole passages of scripture (Bible) explained away.

If you are talking about individuals' faith, that I can agree with. Not all LDS possess the faith that the LDS Church is intent on sharing. The Church is structured in such a way that we hope to bring not only nonmembers closer to the gospel, but our own members (I assume the same is true for the Catholic Church).

and And I think you are viewing a correlation as a causation.

The LDS church seems intent on keeping people LDS, not Christian. That is my impression.

I would suggest it is less that they are being taught and more that there is a lack of teaching of other alternatives. As I stated before, Catholics are taught or at least can observe that there are other valid options of worship of Christ, you yourself have said that it does not automatically impede one's journey toward Christ to leave the Catholic faith; it is a small step for them over to the Eastern Orthodox for example and even most of the Protestants are accepted as part of the extended Body of Christ (IIRC what I read in the Catechism, I couldn't find the reference so I may be phrasing this wrong, perhaps I should use the term "community of Christ") though of course the Catholic faith is seen as the one with the full truth and authority. The view of one faith may not be fundamentally about other churches, but it is a view that impacts the perception of these other churches. We also believe in one faith, one baptism of Christ. It just happens to reside in within the LDS faith. Again for us as well as you, this is a view of Jesus Christ, but the impact on our view of other faiths is that they are not of this one baptism (though individuals may be of the one faith). You are suggesting that it is the view of Christ that makes the difference, I would suggest that it is not...it is the view of other faiths and whether or not we believe we will find Christ in them as well as we once did in the LDS faith.

It is a view of Christ, as first, failing to keep His own Church together, and second, the idea of a "chosen people" that is based on covenants that were fulfilled already, BY HIM. He is the New and Everlasting Covenant. Not Mormonism.

To the rest of your post. It is a pointless discussion really, because LDS have a view that Jesus left us orphans, one that is reflected again in the view of people who leave Mormonism. It is a view I could never share. God is not reliant on us, we are reliant on Him.

At Mass we pray, "Look not on our sins but on the faith of your Church." We believe in God's Mercy, as evidenced by the Cross. LDS, in their view of the "great apostasy" expect us to forget this. To believe that the Holy Spirit was absent for 1800 years. It is an impossible thing to believe, and any conversation based on this premise, is to me, pointless, because it is asking me to deny Jesus Christ Himself.

[charity's child]

blueadept -I'm Charity's Child, not charity. Just wanted to be sure we were clear on that one. (Mom might be upset if we were confused. We don't always agree! )

[charity's child]

Saemo, I have a question. Did God abandon the Jews?

If He did, how could He? They were His chosen people.

If not, why aren't all God's children commanded to practice Judaism?

So how can you say that because our view says Catholicism is not the correct faith, we believe God has abandoned His people?

God never abandons His people. His people abandon Him. And He waits patiently for them to return.

So in answer to your statement that the LDS believe that all other Christian faiths are "orphaned" from God - nope, like any loving parent God is waiting for you to return to Him in love.

Respectfully,

Charity's Child

[saemo]

Saemo, I have a question. Did God abandon the Jews?

No, and the Jews did not abandon God. They are still the children of Abraham. The people of the Old Covenant, which has never been revoked.

If He did, how could He? They were His chosen people.

If not, why aren't all God's children commanded to practice Judaism?

Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophecy and the law.

Why would anyone who claims to have testimony of Christ say they would become Jewish?

So how can you say that because our view says Catholicism is not the correct faith, we believe God has abandoned His people?

God never abandons His people. His people abandon Him. And He waits patiently for them to return.

So in answer to your statement that the LDS believe that all other Christian faiths are "orphaned" from God - nope, like any loving parent God is waiting for you to return to Him in love.

Respectfully,

Charity's Child

You have no evidence of this, and there is no reason to believe these claims. To claim that Jesus could not keep His own Church together, or that the Holy Spirit given to the Church at Pentecost was lost, flies in the face of reason, reality, history and the Church itself, whose faithful have stood as a testimony of all these things, for nearly 2000 years.

It it is a fantasy of belief.

[Calm]

I don't remember ever having the love for God that I have now.

I think it is wonderful that you have that connection with God now.

Mainly, I don't understand people here.

Yes, this is pretty clear from the way you are interpreting the comments just in this thread.

One thing is said one day and contradicted the next, and whole passages of scripture (Bible) explained away.

In my view, this is primarily your interpretation, not the reality (at least not on the side of the LDS in general).

The LDS church seems intent on keeping people LDS, not Christian. That is my impression.

Since we believe that being LDS is being Christian (and being potentially Christian in the fullest sense), your comment makes no sense. If you mean we are intent on people keeping the LDS faith...well, of course since we think it's the purest form of Christ's gospel on earth. Seems rather strange not to care about what someone believes even if only to help them have the best life possible in the here and now, but it would appear to be simply a different mindset, yours appearing to me to be something along the lines of it doesn't matter where men go because they will end up where they are supposed to end. My view is something akin to that in that I believe that men will end up in the Presence of the Lord if they would desire that if given a full chance to accept it, however I also take into account a great deal the pain and suffering that occurs in the here and now and so it is very important to me that people save themselves and others unnecessary hardships through unnecessary detours (I realize for some it is a necessary one, but for many it is a result of pride and a lack of openness to the Lord as is demonstrated over and over again in the scriptures). What a heavenly world could exist in the here and now if a Zion society could be instituted to its full extent.

Your position seems confused to me as on the one hand you call it "life-altering" and heart-breaking, yet on the other you condemn LDS for thinking it's of major importance for someone to remain true to God's faith?

God sorrows when people turn their back on him, he seems to think this is important enough, important enough that he goes to seek the one while leaving the 99 safe at home. I do not see it as inappropriate that LDS share in this sorrow as well when we see someone wander from the flock.

To the rest of your post. It is a pointless discussion really..... God is not reliant on us, we are reliant on Him.

I agree this is a pointless discussion because you continue to rely on a premise that has been disproved first and second, continue to misrepresent the LDS faith (I am assuming here it is based on your own misinterpretation of it, but as still rather astounded by it considering the efforts made here and in the past to correct you...the essential problem I see is that you believe the LDS faith is wrong and are interpreting its assumptions and motivations through that filter, rather than understanding how people who believe the faith is the one that God has given to us out of love and hope see things.) LDS do not see God as being reliant on us, rather he has chosen to love us and nurture us to become truly one with him....something that requires men to make a choice for themselves rather than God making it for them, that is the only thing men are truly self-reliant in. All else that is good are blessings and gifts from God.

At Mass we pray, "Look not on our sins but on the faith of your Church." We believe in God's Mercy, as evidenced by the Cross. LDS, in their view of the "great apostasy" expect us to forget this. To believe that the Holy Spirit was absent for 1800 years. It is an impossible thing to believe, and any conversation based on this premise, is to me, pointless, because it is asking me to deny Jesus Christ Himself.

On the contrary, we do not expect anyone to put aside or discount God's Mercy and His Sacrifice or His Love.

To me, using the logic you are applying to the LDS faith, one runs into the problem that the majority of individuals have been left orphans by Jesus Christ over the millennium of the earth's existence because they have not heard the gospel taught if the actual presence of God's Church is required for God himself to be present. This is completely contrary to any LDS belief. My understanding is that the Catholics believe that God speaks of his existence to all men even if they never knew of the existence of His Church so it doesn't seem to fit with theirs either so I have to wonder where you are getting it.

Since LDS believe the Light of Christ is available to all men at all times, we do not have that problem as you claim, men are not left orphans when the Spirit can be with a man in ancient Mongolia just as the Spirit can be with a man in downtown New York or even Rome or Salt Lake City.

What the Great Apostasy created was a loss of authority and saving ordinances (both of which have not been available to most men over time both before and after Christ's death and even now), not a loss of the Presence of the Spirit and other blessings of the Lord. And the Lord, as a loving Father has made arrangements for all men, not just those blessed to have lived after his Resurrection or among his Chosen people, to receive salvation AND exaltation to the same degree eternally as those who have accepted and received the saving ordinances by those in authority in this life. He knew before the world was created and man formed that apostasies would occur time and time again leaving most men in darkness over the ages so he set in place a plan that would allow for man's mistakes to occur, but not cripple his saving work at any time. Man can seek out God wherever he is, whenever he lives, not just among the people of Abraham or later among the Christians. (I am not saying here that Catholics believe otherwise, just stating what LDS believe because you have made claims that imply otherwise).

That you see a fruitlessness and loss of hope in the LDS faith, one that can be a stumbling block in seeking out Christ because you believe it is fundamentally wrong is understandable and I have no problem with that. I just have a problem when you attempt to diminish our actual beliefs based on your interpretations and experiences, not ours. We do not have faith in the Church and then faith in God, we have faith in God and then he reveals to us his Truth in his Gospel and draws us into the Body of Christ, which is the LDS church in our view just as the Catholic Church is the Body of Christ in the Catholic view. That LDS see denying the Body of Christ as at least in part denying God who has reveal its nature to us makes sense to me, even if you seem to think that it is a diminishment of God somehow, I see the opposite btw, that the existence of God's Church in the form of the LDS faith is an example of his Hand in all things concerning mankind. I would assume you see the Catholic Church in much the same way. If so, again I am confused as to why our reactions are such an issue with you to the point you think we are somehow teaching our members to deny Christ (at least if they ever reach the point of denying God's faith). If anything, the intensity of our feelings about those who leave the faith would seem to indicate the exact opposite.

[saemo]

Well, when you start to use Catholic terms to describe Mormonism, the conversation is done. For one, the Body of Christ is just that, and the LDS claim is that Jesus lost His own Body, and failed to maintain authority over what is explicitly and completely HIS.

Again, there is no evidence for loss of authority. Quite the contrary the evidence for it is abundant, and exists to this day.

[TAO]

think for a minute, if you were living in 1800...

a time when God had not "restored" the church.

if, in 2010, God STILL hadn't restored the church...

it doesn't mean "there is NO God" it just means "there is no restored church"

the point of the thread is to imagine that God had not yet "restored" the church...

then what would you do?

Then you pray on your own and don't belong to a church.

However, if the church exists and then falls, then that's a different story.

[Calm]

Well, when you start to use Catholic terms to describe Mormonism, the conversation is done. For one, the Body of Christ is just that, and the LDS claim is that Jesus lost His own Body, and failed to maintain authority over what is explicitly and completely HIS.

Again, there is no evidence for loss of authority. Quite the contrary the evidence for it is abundant, and exists to this day.

Seriously?

The "Body of Christ" phrase is not a uniquely Catholic one, it is used within the LDS faith as well, for example "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints