3DOP Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Oh, Rory, let your trad flag fly, eh? [traditional Catholic tangent]By the way, what direction does your flag fly? FSSP? SSPX? sedevacantist? I attend an SSPX chapel (60 miles away), but I confess to a traditionally leaning local diocesan priest. But now, with Pope Francis granting faculties to SSPX priests, for the next year I will confess to the priest of the SSPX chapel I attend. I'm not an SSPX partisan (if there was an awesome FSSP chapel here, I'd probably be there), but I love with my whole heart the traditional liturgies and devotions. But I'm also monastically minded, so that's probably part of it.[/traditional Catholic tangent] ETA: yes, Rory and I could probably discuss this privately with messages, but hey, you LDS folk should probably know about the various issues in Catholicism these days Yeah Jesse...Maybe Pope Francis can tell the conservatives that our marriages are valid too for the Year of Mercy. I can hear the conservatives now (post Synod)...Oh yeah, we need to consider the difficult situation of people who have always been considered as living in adultery. Let them have Holy Communion. The Church has been too legalistic. Adulterous marriages contracted in Las Vegas or in front of some mayor or judge or heretic somewhere have a lot of good in them. Good enough for Holy Communion anyway. Attempted marriages between two virgins in front of a SSPX priest? Nah. Invalid. Unmarried. Mortal sin. Does that show where my flag is planted? Heh. You go to Mass where? Albuquerque? We have talked about Silver City. I think I mentioned the brother of my son-in-law is a monk there? Brother C______. Anyway...God bless you on your journey my friend. Say a Hail Mary for the guy that sometimes seems like he is Catholic, but might be schismatic, or thinks there isn't a pope, and calls himself 3DOP. Edited October 31, 2015 by 3DOP 3
MiserereNobis Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Yeah Jesse...Maybe Pope Francis can tell the conservatives that our marriages are valid too for the Year of Mercy. I can hear the conservatives now (post Synod)...Oh yeah, we need to consider the difficult situation of people who have always been considered as living in adultery. Let them have Holy Communion. The Church has been too legalistic. Adulterous marriages contracted in Las Vegas or in front of some mayor or judge or heretic somewhere have a lot of good in them. Good enough for Holy Communion anyway. Attempted marriages between two virgins in front of a SSPX priest? Nah. Invalid. Unmarried. Mortal sin. Does that show where my flag is planted? Heh. You go to Mass where? Albuquerque? We have talked about Silver City. I think I mentioned the brother of my son-in-law is a monk there? Brother C______. Anyway...God bless you on your journey my friend. Say a Hail Mary for the guy that sometimes seems like he is Catholic, but might be schismatic, or thinks there isn't a pope, and calls himself 3DOP. I go to Mass in El Paso, Tx. Jesus and Mary chapel. And yes, I remember now that we talked about Silver City. I love Our Lady of Guadalupe Monastery. I've been there many times on retreat, so I'm sure I've met the brother of your son-in-law. They've been very welcoming of this strange long-haired VW bus driving hippie trying to be a traditional Catholic Also, I love Christ in the Desert Monastery. Not SSPX but very conservative. The abbot has visited Our Lady of Guadalupe (which, as you know, can be hard for some Catholics) and they sometimes celebrate the traditional Mass. I'll pray to Our Mother for you, if you do the same for me. This vale of tears is a hard path to tread, and I pray God's mercy on all of us. (ETA: New Mexico ain't a bad place for old school monasteries located way out in the beautiful wilderness... just check out the websites I've linked) Edited October 31, 2015 by MiserereNobis
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Repentance is not committing the sin again. The steps include confession when necessary. It does not include the need for some type of punishment or specific actions other than restitution to the person harmed, if that is relevant and can be accomplished.I don't think the concepts are the same, though there are similarities.Ceasing the sin is what it is about,not punishment.
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 3DOP and I are telling you what Catholics believe about confession. You, a non-Catholic, are telling us we are wrong. You've done this before. This is an anti-Mormon tactic you are using. Tell the Mormons what they believe even if they tell you that's not what they believe. Why are you doing this? No Catholic believes that the priest forgives you -- it's God that forgives. God requires confession to the priest as part of forgiveness, just like the LDS require confession to a priesthood authority as part of forgiveness for some sins. Our two churches draw the line in different places as to what sins needs to be confessed, but we both require confession to a priesthood authority.Isn't it stronger than "want"? My understanding is that it is required. Can a Mormon get forgiveness of adultery without confession to a bishop and/or stake president, or is it required?These people have no control over forgiveness, they only judge the church membership status.So yes, God might forgive a sin without speaking to any authority, but the person may still be excommunicatedBishops do not forgive sin nor can the absolve anyoneSimilar, but not the same imo 1
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Temple worthiness is another issue. One must have confessed their sins if relevant in order to receive a temple recommend. I had one case where someone came to me and had committed adultery many years earlier and it had never been confessed. Yet that person had forsaken the sin 20 years before. I told her that God had long since forgiven her because of her repentance but now since she had confessed she no longer have to worry about it and was eligible for a temple recommend. She left free of guilt and with the temple recommend. Edited October 31, 2015 by mfbukowski 1
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Utter nonesense about LDS bishops and SPs. Bishops are considered judges in Israel. They can withhold a temple recommend, administer non formal as well as formal discipline. They control the initial process for remission for excommunicated members and they can end formal disfellowshipment status that they may have imposed. They have extreme control of a members standing in the LDS church which for LDS persons impact their status, salvation and exaltation, Tony is uttering simple nonesense on this part of his post.I won't argue with you, but Tony is essentially right.Salvation is controlled by God, not some stake president.Ordinances can be received on the other side, if necessary. That is what the temple is for. I will not argue with you about it 1
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Also Catholics believe, I think,that one can excommunicate oneself by say, divorcing and re-marrying, and thereby losing their salvation.We believe that one need not be LDS to be saved, and that membership and salvation are independent variables.Exaltation is possible for nearly all as long as they accept the necessary ordinances either here or on the other side.Essentially that gives everyone a second chance.
3DOP Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I go to Mass in El Paso, Tx. Jesus and Mary chapel. And yes, I remember now that we talked about Silver City. I love Our Lady of Guadalupe Monastery. I've been there many times on retreat, so I'm sure I've met the brother of your son-in-law. They've been very welcoming of this strange long-haired VW bus driving hippie trying to be a traditional Catholic Also, I love Christ in the Desert Monastery. Not SSPX but very conservative. The abbot has visited Our Lady of Guadalupe (which, as you know, can be hard for some Catholics) and they sometimes celebrate the traditional Mass. I'll pray to Our Mother for you, if you do the same for me. This vale of tears is a hard path to tread, and I pray God's mercy on all of us. (ETA: New Mexico ain't a bad place for old school monasteries located way out in the beautiful wilderness... just check out the websites I've linked) You're a strange long hair (freak flag flying...nod to David Crosby) in a VW bus? Good night. We don't have any of your kind at our chapel right now. But every chapel needs one! (Only one. Heh.) Have you ever met Fr. Michael Rodriguez? I do not know him. I sat at the dinner table with him at an Angelus Press Conference once and exchanged a few words. Its funny, I remember asking him some theological question about monotheletism. I think the question had arisen in one of the conferences. At the time I was non-plused, but now I am impressed because he didn't hesitate to say he didn't know the answer. Not a theologian I guess. A good and humble priest is more precious. Edited October 31, 2015 by 3DOP
Robert F. Smith Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Repentance is not committing the sin again. The steps include confession when necessary. It does not include the need for some type of punishment or specific actions other than restitution to the person harmed, if that is relevant and can be accomplished.I don't think the concepts are the same, though there are similarities.Ceasing the sin is what it is about,not punishment.Although I have found that a bishop will make specific demands on the returning, confessing saint, and will watch his behavior closely before acting on his requests. May take a long while before he is returned to full fellowship and given a temple recommend, if at all. Not punishment, but a form of penance nevertheless. This may be accompanied by denial of taking the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper (communion) for a time, even though that is a voluntary matter.
Robert F. Smith Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 3DOP and I are telling you what Catholics believe about confession. You, a non-Catholic, are telling us we are wrong. You've done this before. This is an anti-Mormon tactic you are using. Tell the Mormons what they believe even if they tell you that's not what they believe. Why are you doing this? No Catholic believes that the priest forgives you -- it's God that forgives. God requires confession to the priest as part of forgiveness, just like the LDS require confession to a priesthood authority as part of forgiveness for some sins. Our two churches draw the line in different places as to what sins needs to be confessed, but we both require confession to a priesthood authority. Isn't it stronger than "want"? My understanding is that it is required. Can a Mormon get forgiveness of adultery without confession to a bishop and/or stake president, or is it required?Correct, and one must confess serious sins such as adultery. There is no getting around it. Moreover, God knows whether you have done so, and will not hold you blameless. Hypocrites beware !!
saemo Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I am very familiar with the word "penance," which meant confessing your sins to a priest, no matter what the sins were. The priest then grants "absolution." I know you can provide plenty of links to "penance," but how about providing a link to something that says "penance" is confessing your sins to God?The Sacrament is called, Penance and Reconciliation, and also commonly called Confession, Penance, or Reconciliation. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm LDS bishops and stake presidents do not act as intermediaries. They want to discuss the gravity of pre-marital sex with any offenders, but there is no doctrine that they can grant absolution.If you are implying a Catholic priest is an intermediary during Confession, then you have an incorrect understanding of Catholic teaching.I don't see that Mormonism teaches absolution of sins. Absolution, in the Catholic understanding, means God has cleared one of their sins and will not hold that sin against that person at judgement. It is, forgotten. There is no belief in Catholicism that a repeated sin nullifies former forgiveness, as the LDS Church teaches. So, no absolution for you! Jesus Christ stated in Doctrine and Covenants 64:7, "I, the Lord, forgive sins unto those who confess their sins before me and ask forgiveness." In Doctrine and Covenants 61:2, Christ stated, "I, the Lord, forgive sins, and am merciful unto those who confess their sins with humble hearts." Doctrine and Covenants 58:42 states, "Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more."Mormons are not Evangelicals. Mormons are required to confess grave sins to their Bishop to be forgiven.
saemo Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Also Catholics believe, I think,that one can excommunicate oneself by say, divorcing and re-marrying, and thereby losing their salvation.We believe that one need not be LDS to be saved, and that membership and salvation are independent variables.Exaltation is possible for nearly all as long as they accept the necessary ordinances either here or on the other side.Essentially that gives everyone a second chance.Mormons are not OSAS!Catholics and Mormons have a similar view, in this regard, that Salvation is given to all, but there is a response required by the individual.Divorce and remarrying does not excommunicate a person. They can still receive Sacraments, such as anointing of the sick and can still have a Catholic funeral. The Catholic Church is quite clear, that anyone in grave sin, be they married, single, religious, clergy or laity, should not receive Communion until confessing their sin in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. There isn't a get out of sin free, by declaring ones own sins as "not so bad". That is not up to the individual.
MiserereNobis Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 You're a strange long hair (freak flag flying...nod to David Crosby) in a VW bus? Good night. We don't have any of your kind at our chapel right now. But every chapel needs one! (Only one. Heh.) Have you ever met Fr. Michael Rodriguez? I do not know him. I sat at the dinner table with him at an Angelus Press Conference once and exchanged a few words. Its funny, I remember asking him some theological question about monotheletism. I think the question had arisen in one of the conferences. At the time I was non-plused, but now I am impressed because he didn't hesitate to say he didn't know the answer. Not a theologian I guess. A good and humble priest is more precious. Yes, I know Fr. Rodriguez. He's been my confessor on occasion (well, years ago) and I chanted in the schola for a Mass or two that he said. Small world sometimes
Tacenda Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Congratulations! You are the second poster to make it to my ignore list.He wasn't being glib, just in case you needed to know. I wonder if Satan was a God of a world. He had the PH, and was portrayed as having the emblem of it by wearing the apron. He was the one that showed Eve that she needed her eyes open to be a God. If that is the right way, why wouldn't God have her do it? I guess it's about choice and accountability, but she was warned not to eat of the fruit. Mind abuse is what I call it. So out of God and Satan which was the abuser? That's why I believe it was wrong to eat of the fruit, if you believe in God. If you believe otherwise you just may believe in Satan. Now put me on your ignore list. And btw, Christians believe as I do. They believe God needed to come down and take a physical body to save the world from the sin of Adam and Eve. I believe, don't know for sure, that LDS are the only ones that believe Eve did the right thing, by following Satan. 1
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Although I have found that a bishop will make specific demands on the returning, confessing saint, and will watch his behavior closely before acting on his requests. May take a long while before he is returned to full fellowship and given a temple recommend, if at all. Not punishment, but a form of penance nevertheless. This may be accompanied by denial of taking the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper (communion) for a time, even though that is a voluntary matter.Yes, good point,that nearly always happens as well.Another difference though is our disciplinary council system, which socializes the process. Though one makes the final decision, the bishop/SP shares the decision responsibilities. This adds another whole dynamic. Yet it is up to the bishop to decide if a council is to be held. Council decisions can be appealed as well.My point I think was more about absolution. We do not believe that a man can absolve sin, ever, even though the scriptures say otherwise.We do not believe that forgiveness of sin is a priesthood power to which we hold the keys. We would never say "I absolve you from your sins" Edited October 31, 2015 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Mormons are not OSAS!Catholics and Mormons have a similar view, in this regard, that Salvation is given to all, but there is a response required by the individual.Divorce and remarrying does not excommunicate a person. They can still receive Sacraments, such as anointing of the sick and can still have a Catholic funeral. The Catholic Church is quite clear, that anyone in grave sin, be they married, single, religious, clergy or laity, should not receive Communion until confessing their sin in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. There isn't a get out of sin free, by declaring ones own sins as "not so bad". That is not up to the individual.Oh good,sister that means I am still also Catholic!Doesn't that make you happy? ! Edited October 31, 2015 by mfbukowski
MiserereNobis Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Oh good,sister that means I am still also Catholic!Doesn't that make you happy? !Hey everybody,a Catholic Mormon temple worker and former bishop! Cool! You'll always be Catholic -- you were baptized and that can't be taken away (you're our secret agent on the LDS inside...) ETA: like that Cylon on the new Battlestar Gallactica who didn't even know she was a Cylon... Edited October 31, 2015 by MiserereNobis
saemo Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Oh good,sister that means I am still also Catholic!Doesn't that make you happy? !Of course.
saemo Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) A comparison if what excommunication means, is worthwhile. Theologically, it is removing oneself from communion. Thus, ex communion. For Catholics, grave sin removes us from communion. This does not mean we are no longer members of the Catholic Chuch. It means our relationship with God has been damaged. God desires that this not be so, which is why Jesus gave to us the the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation. Where we are reconciled to God AND to the Church, which is all the faithful. A person who is outside of communion, is still a member of the Body of Christ, but removed from the grace of communion. This is if course, a Big Deal to Catholics, as the intimate communion with Christ, and through Him each other, is central to our faith. But, there isn't a rite to undo baptism in Catholicism. Baptism is understood as a permanent mark on the soul. We view that as a good thing. Once a penitent enters into reconciliation, through the Sacrament of Penance, the person is reconciled and can receive communion. Excommunicate in Mormonism, and erroneously in the minds of some Catholics (practicing or not) is that excommunication means one is no longer a member of the church from which they are excommunicated. For LDS, this is the meaning of excommunication.So when I say, divorced and remarried are not excommunicated, I'm assuming an LDS person is using the definition that LDS use. In that context, no, a Catholic is not excommunicated as LDS understand the meaning of the word. They are ex'd from communion, in the Catholic context and meaning of the word. Edited October 31, 2015 by saemo 1
Teancum Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I won't argue with you, but Tony is essentially right.Salvation is controlled by God, not some stake president.Ordinances can be received on the other side, if necessary. That is what the temple is for. I will not argue with you about it Sure. But Tony essentially criticized the Catholic process of confession and penance or repentance when the LDS and Catholic processes are not all that different.
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) A comparison if what excommunication means, is worthwhile. Theologically, it is removing oneself from communion. Thus, ex communion. For Catholics, grave sin removes us from communion. This does not mean we are no longer members of the Catholic Chuch. It means our relationship with God has been damaged. God desires that this not be so, which is why Jesus gave to us the the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation. Where we are reconciled to God AND to the Church, which is all the faithful. A person who is outside of communion, is still a member of the Body of Christ, but removed from the grace of communion. This is if course, a Big Deal to Catholics, as the intimate communion with Christ, and through Him each other, is central to our faith. But, there isn't a rite to undo baptism in Catholicism. Baptism is understood as a permanent mark on the soul. We view that as a good thing. Once a penitent enters into reconciliation, through the Sacrament of Penance, the person is reconciled and can receive communion. Excommunicate in Mormonism, and erroneously in the minds of some Catholics (practicing or not) is that excommunication means one is no longer a member of the church from which they are excommunicated. For LDS, this is the meaning of excommunication.So when I say, divorced and remarried are not excommunicated, I'm assuming an LDS person is using the definition that LDS use. In that context, no, a Catholic is not excommunicated as LDS understand the meaning of the word. They are ex'd from communion, in the Catholic context and meaning of the word.Helpful, thanks.This is what was rolling around in my head confusing me:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latae_sententiaeSince I am now a heretic, I guess I am goe anyway Edited October 31, 2015 by mfbukowski
MiserereNobis Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Helpful, thanks.This is what was rolling around in my head confusing me:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latae_sententiaeSince I am now a heretic, I guess I am goe anyway Yup. You are excommunicated (and a heretic to boot!) but you're still a Catholic and we still love you (Baptism leaves in an indelible mark on your soul... you're like a mademan in the mafia... you can never get out ) 1
mfbukowski Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I guess the mark is so God doesn't forget? Yes I remember that from Catechism. 10 years of pre-Vatican II pagan babies bouncing around in my brain. I bought a bunch! Limbo, Purgatory, bleeding hosts,nuns with yard sticks,etc.Oh well we have polygamy and the curse of Cain, and the evils of evolution. The world is changing.
MiserereNobis Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Oh, for the good ol' days of nuns with yard sticks... *nostalgia*
Recommended Posts