And This Pope Rocks On

[why me]

As for Catholic intellectuals, it's a broad stroke you've made. Which ignores Catholic scholars who are not clergy, or male. But yes, I am a simple Catholic. Mass, prayer, scripture is my focus. I pick up the odd theological book now and then, mainly to assist in my teaching of the faith to Catholic converts. Outside of that my interest is in living the Christian faith. How it is possible to live this way, in the normal, hohum, of everyday life, in a home where I am outnumbered by atheists! In a state where I am outnumbered by Mormons. I see the stark differences because I live in them.

 

But your simple catholic background does not stop you from coming here telling mormons just what there faith teaches according to you. Then, these simple mormons tell you that you are wrong and yet, you continue with  your same 'simple catholic' stereotypes of the mormon faith. However, excluding the mention of catholic in your above post, most mormons here will state that they are attempting to live the same life as you.

 

How is it possible to live close to god when surrounded by atheists and people of other faiths who may have a misuderstanding of who i am as a mormon? Such a setence can be written by many here. You have a lot in common with mormons.

[why me]

The Catholic Church has taught and still teaches that those that die in mortal sin go to Hell. 

 

The Pope doesn't "need" to do anything.  It is clear that mortal sin, not repented of, leads to Hell. 

 

 

Your first sentence above is true. Hell is still in the catechism. However, I am not certain that the priests are speaking about the concept of hell and why it is important to lead saintly lives because of it. I have heard catholics who are technically sinning speak about god's mercy and love and how all will be well because of it in the afterlife. No concept of giving up the life of sin. In the past the idea of hell was very much in the vocabulary but not now. If I am correct and if hell is not actively learned and discussed in the catholic church because of fear that people would leave the fold, is the catholic church doing its members a service or disservice? And if priests ignore the concept of hell for the same fear, are they doing their parishioners a favor?

 

And that leads to your other sentence that I pasted. I don't think that it is so clear anymore.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/06/the-truth-about-pope-francis-and-atheists.html

 

In other words there is some confusion out there. And the pope should help the situation by clarifying what he said or does not say. But this should have happened in June. Catholics may be just as confused as the person writing the article.

Edited January 4, 2014 by why me

[Stone holm]

I have said more than once that if I lost faith in COJCOLDS I would either become an atheist or a Catholic.  I say that because if I lost faith in COJCOLDS I would probably reject religion altogether but if I didn't the only religion I would even consider would be Catholic.

 

Ah but alas the spirit whispers to me that I have taken the right path testifies to me that the truth claims of the COJCOLDS are indeed true.

Personal spiritual encounters hold my testimony in place sometimes in spite of the Church, if I ever left the Church I doubt I would do organized religion again, as I doubt that I would ever find a Church with as appealing doctrine, though I expect I would dabble in Buddhist practices and possibly some Native American practices. I don't do authoritarianism well, and without my personal testimony, I would not do Mormonism well because of that.

[teddyaware]

Personal spiritual encounters hold my testimony in place sometimes in spite of the Church, if I ever left the Church I doubt I would do organized religion again, as I doubt that I would ever find a Church with as appealing doctrine, though I expect I would dabble in Buddhist practices and possibly some Native American practices. I don't do authoritarianism well, and without my personal testimony, I would not do Mormonism well because of that.

Good morning Stone,

It's about zero here in Jersey. Wondering how much colder it is up there in the Green Mountain State?

I have a question for you I could also ask of many other folks on this board, but I'm interested in how you in particular willl answer. Over time, I've read many LDS Church members here who've said what you said above, and that is, "if I ever left the Church..." As I said, you're not the only one to express yourself in this way and it causes me to wonder...

 

For example, I just can't imagine the following people ever saying, either publicly or privately, "if I ever left the Church:" Abraham, Moses, the Apostles John and Paul, Nephi, Alma, Mormon, Moroni, The Brother of Jared, Brigham Young, Ezra Taft Benson, Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas Monson, and a host of others. As for yours truly, he can't imagine ever saying those words either, not even if said only to himself in the private thoughts of his mind. 

 

Without going into the reasons why I don't believe the brethren listed above would ever say or think those words, I'm interested as to why some LDS participants here seem to express themselves with those words quite easily, naturally and seemingly unconsciously?   

[teddyaware]

There is a hint in the word Apocryphal, that tells us the books are not equal to the rest of the Bible. They held a separate and unequal position to what is considered authentic Hebrew scripture, by Protestants. Removed in teaching as equal, as apocryphal,, it was only a matter of time that the books would be physically removed. They were bound for a time, together, placed between the OT and NT as something "other".

I have a fondness for the New American Bible, but also have the New Jerusalem Bible. I have my favorite books, that I never tire of reading over and over, particularly, the Gospel of John the Evangelist,

A Bible teacher I had years ago liked to say, the best Bible to use is the one you'll read. I tend to add qualifiers, as there are some really bad Bibles in circulation.

As for Catholic intellectuals, it's a broad stroke you've made. Which ignores Catholic scholars who are not clergy, or male. But yes, I am a simple Catholic. Mass, prayer, scripture is my focus. I pick up the odd theological book now and then, mainly to assist in my teaching of the faith to Catholic converts. Outside of that my interest is in living the Christian faith. How it is possible to live this way, in the normal, hohum, of everyday life, in a home where I am outnumbered by atheists! In a state where I am outnumbered by Mormons. I see the stark differences because I live in them.

My soul, in this desert, is fed by God. I enjoy Catholic writings, the scriptures, and prayer. And even though I drive Mormons nuts, I like to dialogue with you because you are my roots. And, I like Mormons. Though, I don't get the impression very often the fondness is two-way.

Peace be with you.

The vast majority of Latter-day Saints are people of exceeding good will, so you can count on the fondness going both ways. Because of our theology and doctrine sets us free to love all people, effectively dispelling an "us and them" mindset, the Latter-day Saints have a positive feeling toward the other earthly children of our Heavenly Father. As we don't believe the Catholics will be condemned to an endless hell for rejecting our beliefs, we are liberated from prejudices that might cause ill will to prevail.

For example, I believe it's very unlikely one will ever find a Latter-day Saint of mature understanding getting on to a Catholic discussion board to belittle and denigrate Catholic beliefs. This may happen with an immature teenager or someone who's never outgrown the immaturity of the teen years, but the Saints are always taught to embrace the good, the true, uplifting, the love inspiring and the ennobling that can be found in almost all religions. Because we are taught and do believe that the Light of Christ, and its inspirational goodness, is the common inheritance of all peoples of the world, we find it easy to get along with and even embrace in love others who are not of our faith.

 

One of the only times you may see a Latter-day Saint of mature mind and understanding get their "back up" a little is when people ridicule and mock our cherished beliefs. But even then the responses are measured, not at all reciprocating the unkindness in anywhere near the same proportion in which it was meted.

[Hestia]

But you do make it all sound so nice. But nice try.

 

Whoa, Why me. That is not appropriate. Tone it down or leave the thread.

[Hestia]

....now that I have called you out on the risk to your soul. It is the way of the sinner, to explain away sin, and hell.

Same for you.

 

EVERYONE! Stop preaching and judging others.

[Yirgacheffe]

I am not in a bad position since I was born catholic and went to catechism every sunday after mass. Back then there was a clear distinction between who went to heaven and who went to hell. And hell was very much alive for us kids. The post where you responded to me was full of questions. Where is the preaching? When a catholic speaks about love and mercy in platitudes, i would like to know just where hell is situated in all this.

So them former LDS members are in a good position to tell what should be said and done in LDS services, I'll have to pay more attention to their complaints, criticisms, and advice.  Since there seems to be no disagreement with your position I'll have to accept that, like you as a former member, former LDS members really do know what should be going on in the LDS church.

[ChristKnight]

But your simple catholic background does not stop you from coming here telling mormons just what there faith teaches according to you. Then, these simple mormons tell you that you are wrong and yet, you continue with  your same 'simple catholic' stereotypes of the mormon faith.

 

I know this was addressed to saemo, but I frankly find it highly ironic in light of the way you post about Catholicism (and not just in this thread, though it is replete with examples).

 

 

Your first sentence above is true. Hell is still in the catechism. However, I am not certain that the priests are speaking about the concept of hell and why it is important to lead saintly lives because of it. I have heard catholics who are technically sinning speak about god's mercy and love and how all will be well because of it in the afterlife. No concept of giving up the life of sin. In the past the idea of hell was very much in the vocabulary but not now. If I am correct and if hell is not actively learned and discussed in the catholic church because of fear that people would leave the fold, is the catholic church doing its members a service or disservice? And if priests ignore the concept of hell for the same fear, are they doing their parishioners a favor?

 

And that leads to your other sentence that I pasted. I don't think that it is so clear anymore.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/06/the-truth-about-pope-francis-and-atheists.html

 

In other words there is some confusion out there. And the pope should help the situation by clarifying what he said or does not say. But this should have happened in June. Catholics may be just as confused as the person writing the article.

 

Firstly, I will say that I do agree with what Yirgacheffe said earlier.  It really is getting tiring having you state what the leader of another faith *should* be doing. 

 

Secondly, It really is irrelevant what individual Catholics that are not aware of the actual teachings of their Church are claiming.  If you heard Catholics that are "technically sinning" claim that all will be well in the afterlife due to God's mercy and love, such a statement (and I'm only going off of what you state here, nor do I know that person's heart, which really points to another issue I'll address shortly) is not based off of actual Catholic teaching.  Latter-day Saints and Catholics would agree that it is correct to judge a faith based on what they actually teach, and not the incorrect musings of individual members.  The fact is that the Catholic Church, including today, teaches the importance of repentance and turning away from sin.  The Sacrament of Reconciliation has always been emphasized (as well, various Catholic authors have come out with popular books on the matter, such as Scott Hahn's Lord, Have Mercy: The Healing Power of Confession, and Vinny Flynn's 7 Secrets of Confession), as has the importance of not being in a state of mortal sin prior to taking the Eucharist. 

 

As for your article, I disagree, nor is there any confusion on the matter.  I actually already addressed this earlier in this thread.  As cited in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church teaches that salvation only comes through Jesus Christ.  The ordinary means of salvation is by coming to Christ through His Kingdom, partaking of the life-giving sacraments.  The Catholic Church also states that God may also save/lead to Him, in a way only known to Him, those that, through no fault of their own, did not know that the Catholic Church is the "true Church" nor about the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Ultimately, there is no way to judge this, as only God knows our hearts and can judge us in His mercy, love, and justice.  I doubt Catholics, who know their faith (in contrast to the Catholics you mentioned re: sinning), would not be confused at all by Pope Francis' words (though they may be confused by secular/non-Catholic sensationalization of his words, outside of a Catholic context). 

 

So again, your characterization is false.  The Popes and other Catholic leaders emphasize the importance of living a Christ-like life, the importance of participating in the freeing power of the Sacrament of Reconciliation to God, and a life fed by the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist (and to partake of it, one must not be in a state of mortal sin).  They wouldn't do this if the reality of Hell wasn't there, and if they didn't believe in the eternal blessings that come from such a life, as the Catholic Church has always taught.

 

[saemo]

Well, first off I apologize for my comments about your soul. I am not judging you, I leave that to God.

 

I observe what people say, the orientation that LDS have towards topics. I come to my own conclusions and express them. Not as a means towards demeaning Mormonism but to draw out thoughts and ideas. I find very few LDS who take what I say seriously enough to form a response that considers what I actually said. I just get broad strokes, like stereotypes and anti Mormon. At least you are not passive aggressive about what you think.

 

I haven't found I have much in common with Mormon neighbors. From years of trying to fit in, inviting people over, only to be shunned by the same people who act like they don't know me once I've turned down their invitations to go to church. So, I no longer try to be friends with Mormons. Sure, I'm friendly. A new person has come around, because she assigned to. First impression is, I like her, and I'm friendly, but once her assignment changes to someone else I'll never see her again. That is how a relationship works.with LDS in these parts. I'm an assignment. LOL. Can't imagine striking up a conversation about God and the things I think about at Mass or while praying. Like I do with Catholic friends.

 

 

 

See ya around. When the door is shown it's time to go.

 

But your simple catholic background does not stop you from coming here telling mormons just what there faith teaches according to you. Then, these simple mormons tell you that you are wrong and yet, you continue with  your same 'simple catholic' stereotypes of the mormon faith. However, excluding the mention of catholic in your above post, most mormons here will state that they are attempting to live the same life as you.

 

How is it possible to live close to god when surrounded by atheists and people of other faiths who may have a misuderstanding of who i am as a mormon? Such a setence can be written by many here. You have a lot in common with mormons.

[thesometimesaint]

I appreciate your faith. I really do. But for me, what I see in the LDS teaching is this life doesn't matter. Do whatever, whenever, and it's even better if you do not become LDS. Party on!!

 

That is a misunderstanding. Now in this life is the time to prepare to meet God. To repent of our sins. To become spotless before him. To be judged for works that we did in mortality. No one whom has ever lived on this earth is exempt from those requirements. Everyone will be left without excuse. God is merciful to those that never, in this life, learned/fully understood about Jesus the Christ and his Church. We are not to judge the eternal fate of our fellow beings, that is Gods' job. So we teach to anyone whom will listen. In LDS Theology everyone whom has ever lived on this earth will have the opportunity to learn/fully understand the Gospel. To accept or reject it to whatever level they want. God isn't going to force me to be with him. So if I'm only willing to accept a little of the Gospel, then my reward in Heaven will be little. Likewise if I am willing to accept a lot my rewards will be a lot                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Edited January 4, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[thesometimesaint]

Well, first off I apologize for my comments about your soul. I am not judging you, I leave that to God.

 

I observe what people say, the orientation that LDS have towards topics. I come to my own conclusions and express them. Not as a means towards demeaning Mormonism but to draw out thoughts and ideas. I find very few LDS who take what I say seriously enough to form a response that considers what I actually said. I just get broad strokes, like stereotypes and anti Mormon. At least you are not passive aggressive about what you think.

 

I haven't found I have much in common with Mormon neighbors. From years of trying to fit in, inviting people over, only to be shunned by the same people who act like they don't know me once I've turned down their invitations to go to church. So, I no longer try to be friends with Mormons. Sure, I'm friendly. A new person has come around, because she assigned to. First impression is, I like her, and I'm friendly, but once her assignment changes to someone else I'll never see her again. That is how a relationship works.with LDS in these parts. I'm an assignment. LOL. Can't imagine striking up a conversation about God and the things I think about at Mass or while praying. Like I do with Catholic friends.

 

 

 

See ya around. When the door is shown it's time to go.

 

The good thing about friends is they know everything about us, and still like us anyway. I sure hope you and I are friends.

[why me]

Firstly, I will say that I do agree with what Yirgacheffe said earlier.  It really is getting tiring having you state what the leader of another faith *should* be doing. 

 

You may be right. However, since i was born catholic and have attended mass within the last month, I think that I am entitled to an opinion. I have seen many exmormons on the catholic site express horrible opinions about the mormon faith and I have seen catholics do the same. Most are 'experts' on mormon beliefs. And we have seen the same from saemo who expressed what she beleived the mormon faith is. Is it fair that these people can express their opinions about mormonism but I can not write what I feel the pope should be doing? Have I mocked the pope? No. Have I mocked catholicism? No. I was just engaging with a catholic who not just posted about her own understanding but also told us what mormons believe.

[why me]

Whoa, Why me. That is not appropriate. Tone it down or leave the thread.

I suppose that I am just a little sensitive when catholics tell mormons what they believe. I have seen it on their own apologetic site. It is not very nice to hear such mocking and unchristlike behavior over there and when one of their own pays us a visit, well...I find it hard to take. I will try to be nicer the next time.

[why me]

First impression is, I like her, and I'm friendly, but once her assignment changes to someone else I'll never see her again. That is how a relationship works.with LDS in these parts. I'm an assignment. LOL. Can't imagine striking up a conversation about God and the things I think about at Mass or while praying. Like I do with Catholic friends.

 

 

I have never seen anyone become an assignment. It would be interesting to find out just where the assignments are given and by whom. Does anyone on this thread have any experience in being assigned someone to convert on your block by a local church leader?

[The Nehor]

EVERYONE! Stop preaching and judging others.

 

That was a terrible thing you said and you are doubtlessly going to hell for it.

[Yirgacheffe]

.

 

 

 

Firstly, I will say that I do agree with what Yirgacheffe said earlier.  It really is getting tiring having you state what the leader of another faith *should* be doing. 

 

 

It's not just that, it is the repeated innuendo that Francis is just publicity whoring, that is just as offensive as the innuendo that LDS leadership is money grubbing. 

[teddyaware]

I have never seen anyone become an assignment. It would be interesting to find out just where the assignments are given and by whom. Does anyone on this thread have any experience in being assigned someone to convert on your block by a local church leader?

I have never seen anyone become an assignment. It would be interesting to find out just where the assignments are given and by whom. Does anyone on this thread have any experience in being assigned someone to convert on your block by a local church leader?

The fact is that we Latter-day Saints are encouraged to share the gospel message with our neighbors, just as the Lord commanded His Church to do. If there is something wrong with this then it should be taken up with the Divine Lord who commanded such an all-encompassing missionary outreach. I guess because the Catholic Church doesn't have the same kind of dynamic program of missionary outreach, in obedience to the Saviour's commandment to preach the gospel "to every creature", saemo finds it all rather strange. Perhaps unfamiliarity with this great commandment of the Lord causes her to see missionary efforts in a distorted and uncharitable way

Anyway, most any form of missionary outreach could be considered an assignment or commission. In fact, the Saviour's commandment to preach the gospel to every creature is often referred to by Christians of many faiths as "THE GREAT COMMISSION".

Saemo just keeps digging herself into a deeper hole. Now she's even gone so far as to think there's something inappropriate and dubious about the Lord's Great Commission to bring the glad tidings of his glorious gospel to all the inhabitants of the world.

Edited January 4, 2014 by teddyaware

[Stone holm]

It's not just that, it is the repeated innuendo that Francis is just publicity whoring, that is just as offensive as the innuendo that LDS leadership is money grubbing.

I have never aid that, the Pope amazes me.

[thesometimesaint]

I think he is still the Pope, and amazing to boot.

[why me]

The fact is that we Latter-day Saints are encouraged to share the gospel message with our neighbors, just as the Lord commanded His Church to do. If there is something wrong with this then it should be taken up with the Divine Lord who commanded such an all-encompassing missionary outreach.

Missionary work is missionary work. However the use of the word assignment was what prompted me to respond. Saemo saw herself as an assignment for the mormons on her block. And when she wasn't interested, she was shunned. Here is how she stated it:

 

I haven't found I have much in common with Mormon neighbors. From years of trying to fit in, inviting people over, only to be shunned by the same people who act like they don't know me once I've turned down their invitations to go to church. So, I no longer try to be friends with Mormons. Sure, I'm friendly. A new person has come around, because she assigned to. First impression is, I like her, and I'm friendly, but once her assignment changes to someone else I'll never see her again. That is how a relationship works.with LDS in these parts. I'm an assignment. LOL. Can't imagine striking up a conversation about God and the things I think about at Mass or while praying. Like I do with Catholic friends.

 

I can't imagine this happening.

[why me]

It's not just that, it is the repeated innuendo that Francis is just publicity whoring, that is just as offensive as the innuendo that LDS leadership is money grubbing. 

I think that this was more or less directed at me. When the media is following someone around, taking photos, noting every word that is said, that person could be tempted to get a good photo op. And so one needs to be careful with one's intent. Human nature is human nature. The pope was Time magazine's person of the year and Esquire magazine's best dressed man of the year. These awards basically come from the publicity the pope is receiving from the media following him around and the photos that have been taken of him with the public.

 

Every human being should be careful that such publicity does not go to their heads. Pure in spirit, pure in soul and humbleness and humility could all be corrupted and people could question the person's intent.

Edited January 4, 2014 by why me

[Tacenda]

Missionary work is missionary work. However the use of the word assignment was what prompted me to respond. Saemo saw herself as an assignment for the mormons on her block. And when she wasn't interested, she was shunned. Here is how she stated it:

I haven't found I have much in common with Mormon neighbors. From years of trying to fit in, inviting people over, only to be shunned by the same people who act like they don't know me once I've turned down their invitations to go to church. So, I no longer try to be friends with Mormons. Sure, I'm friendly. A new person has come around, because she assigned to. First impression is, I like her, and I'm friendly, but once her assignment changes to someone else I'll never see her again. That is how a relationship works.with LDS in these parts. I'm an assignment. LOL. Can't imagine striking up a conversation about God and the things I think about at Mass or while praying. Like I do with Catholic friends.

I can't imagine this happening.

Sometimes religion just gets in the way of relationships, I wonder if God is just plain sick of it. Don't we as parents just want our children to get along and be close? Why can't we be close to one another? In my walk as an LDS in Utah, I have never had the closeness, just the great acquaintance with them, there always seemed to be a wedge between the non lds or the inactive and I. I couldn't relate and vice versa. I really can't wait for the day that politics & religion aren't "markers" any longer, if it is to ever be.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Tacenda

[why me]

Here is an example from the media about the pope and carmelite nuns.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/caught-tape-pope-francis-leaves-voicemail-spanish-nuns-article-1.1566177

 

Now here is my problem. How did the media find out about this? Who informed them of such a private initiative? And why? Is this news worthy? Plus, we have a couple of photos of the pope getting a selfie, waving to the public. People that study Media for a living must be having interesting research at the moment as they investigate just how the pope is being portrayed in the media. And how such professional photographers are getting such wonderful photos.

 

Also, the carmelites are usually not media prone. They tend to b sequestered:

 

"The work of this house is prayer "- St Teresa

The following is a typical day in one of our Monasteries:

 

5.30 am Rising signal

6.00 am Prayer time (Meditation) either in solitude or in the chapel

7.00 am Lauds/Morning Prayer (Divine Office prayed together in the chapel: psalms, readings etc spread throughout the day to mark its passing and to consecrate our time to God)

7.45 am Terce (Divine Office)

8.00 am MASS

8.45 am Breakfast

9.00 am Work*

11.30 am Sext (Divine Office)

11.45 am Dinner (in silence with a reading from the Bible and other spiritual books)

12.15 pm Washing up, preparing vegetables etc - in silence

12.45pm Morning recreation - a time to relax and talk together

1.15 pm Free time in the cell (the nuns' private room).

1.45 pm Spiritual Reading in the cell (or garden in summer)

1.45 pm None (Divine Office) followed by a cup of tea.

3.00 pm Work*

4.30 pm Prayer time (Meditation) either in solitude or in the chapel.

5.30 pm Vespers/Evening Prayer (Divine Office)

6.00 pm Evening meal, washing up

6.45 pm Recreation together

7.45 pm Office of Readings (Divine Office- the longest one of the day with psalms and extended Bible readings and other readings)

The Great Silence follows this - free time for prayer, reading or hobbies etc but all in strict silence. This silence lasts until after Mass the next day.

9.15 pm Compline - the last prayer of the day. Retire to cells

10.30 pm Lights out.

*Work varies from monastery to monastery. It can consist in the manufacture of altar breads for churches, vestment work, printing, craft work, gardening, cooking, office work, sewing and the usual household tasks. Each sister works alone and in silence where possible, only speaking when really necessary for carrying out her work.

 

http://www.carmelnuns.org.uk/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=15&MMN_position=19:19

 

Not the type to notify the media of a phone conversation with the pope. So who did? And why?

Edited January 4, 2014 by why me

[why me]

ISometimes religion just gets in the way of relationships, I wonder if God is just plain sick of it. Don't we as parents just want our children to get along and be close? Why can't we be close to one another? In my walk as an LDS in Utah, I have never had the closeness, just the great acquaintance with them, there always seemed to be a wedge between the non lds or the inactive and I. I couldn't relate and vice versa. I really can't wait for the day that politics & religion aren't "markers" any longer, if it is to ever be.

The problem is: the lds church does not teach to shun those who are not interested in the lds faith. Just the opposite. My point is: I have to question the experience of saemo. Whatever the lds were doing to her was not taught by the lds church. So, I am a little suspicious.