(August 15, 2017 at 4:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: They see gays as people equal in dignity and loved by God just the same as everyone else, as we are all sinners.

No. For startes according to mormon doctirine gays interrupt Mormon plan in heaven. They think that Jesus was a man that when he died he became god and lives in Heaven with his many wives and kids. They also belive that when Mormons marry in the temple and die they also become gods living on other planets with their many wives. Since gays and lesbians don't marry people of the opposite sex they see it as disturbance of their concept of the afterlife. That's why they were known to torture gay mormons in Brigham Young University.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/mormon-gay-...d=13240700
And as article states Mormons still get excommunicated if the can't be healed from homosexuality: Pruden, who is a Mormon bishop in his ward, said ex-communication is a last resort after probation and several other steps of reintegration into the church have failed.
"It's a very painful process of losing your membership," Pruden said. "There is a heritage of love attachment that happens to Latter-Day Saints. ... There is a lot of hurt and I feel for those people."

Not to mention few years ago when they were propping prop 8 so much so that LDS drained many of their members to bankruptcy to push it.

Um that article is from things that happened in the 70's. Unfortunately our whole culture was harsh towards gays at that time. Applying something that happened almost 50 years ago to Mormons of today is ridiculous.

I'm not sure what their beliefs are regarding the afterlife, and I have learned not to take anything you say as full truth because you're the type of person who can't give objective facts without butchering them with your own hateful/prejudiced sentiments.

I am friends with mormons, and we have had these talks. Saying Mormons all think gays should kill themselves, or that they believe being gay in and of itself is sinful, couldn't be farthest from the truth.

(August 15, 2017 at 4:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I already know.

Mormons currently believe that it is a sin to act on homosexual attraction, though having homosexual attraction in and of itself is not a sin because it is not freely chosen. They see gays as people equal in dignity and loved by God just the same as everyone else, as we are all sinners.

This is the same belief regarding homosexuality as the majority of Christian denominations. Mormons are no different in that sense.

TFTFY

Everything (literally) in the Mormon orbit is subject to change, as it has been since Joe Smith saw the blinding light in the woods in (pick one)  1817, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822, 1823, or 1824.

(Joe Smith has claimed various years for the First Visitation and researchers have noted problems with all them contradicting known historical details and have proposed other years. The Mormon hierarchy claims all the conflicting dates and the greatly differing accounts presented by Joe Smith on different occasions are "remarkably consistent".  A skeptic might suspect Joe was telling so many lies and making up so much folderol that he was not able to keep track of it)

And that is literally the basis of so many other denominations viewing Mormonism as a false religion, or a non-Christian one.


The Catholic Church has spent years studying Mormon teachings on baptism and concluded Mormon's are so disordered on the topic they will not accept Mormon baptisms as valid. Catholic hierarchy does recognize most other (ostensibly) Christian denominations baptismal rites and beliefs as valid, but NOT Mormons.


That's pretty close to asserting Mormon's are not Christians, if it isn't actually asserting they are not Christians.

IANMTU

(August 14, 2017 at 3:06 pm)Harry Nevis Wrote:

(August 14, 2017 at 2:29 pm)Drich Wrote: No.. I not saying one can not be saved and be a catholic I am simply pointing out why "we" (any of us) can not call ourselves Christian. That is a title only Jesus can award. we can only say we follow Christ or not. Even then that i not a prerequisite to salvation, as I can name a whole bunch of names of men who did not follow Christ but will be in Heaven.

No, you can't name anyone.  Well, you COULD, but it'd be just your ego claiming to know the mind of your god.  So, go ahead.  It'll probably be a riot.

Surely King David a man after God's own Heart who knew nothing of Christ will be in Heaven, if David then soloman his son a man who was given the greatest measure of wisdom a man could have. and if those two the sure the patriarchs again most of which did not even know God in any religious sense, which would make them deists/not belonging to any formal religion.

And then you have the prophet elisha/elija (i forgot which) was just called up to heaven never knowing death. again another deist and not 'christian.'

So yeah I do proclaim to know the mind of God in this matter.. how??? it is spelled out on page, I just use modern terms to describe forgotten/over looked bible passages.

---

(August 14, 2017 at 3:10 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(August 14, 2017 at 2:29 pm)Drich Wrote: No.. I not saying one can not be saved and be a catholic I am simply pointing out why "we" (any of us) can not call ourselves Christian. That is a title only Jesus can award. we can only say we follow Christ or not. Even then that i not a prerequisite to salvation, as I can name a whole bunch of names of men who did not follow Christ but will be in Heaven.

Can you share some of those names?

When it comes to the eternal state of a person's soul, I find that it is not my place to cast judgement... and so I always try to take the most charitable assumption.

see above

---

(August 14, 2017 at 3:43 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(August 14, 2017 at 10:04 am)Drich Wrote: Really?!?! do you want clear examples?
1 tim 4:1-5 Warns us of false teachers. one of the first things that identifies a false teacher is a restriction for anyone to marry. This includes those who serve God. Matter of fact we are told that should any of us burn with passion we should marry.

Then there is this whole other issue of worshiping (worship being defined as: verb 1. show reverence and adoration for; honor with religious rites.) Saints and angels. We are clearly told NOT to do this. Yet The R/C church not only endorses this practice but enforces and defines which demi god/saint to pray to for what you are suffering from. These men/saints have no place nor power outside what The Holy Spirit enables them to do. Even Christ as a man was empowered by the Holy Spirit (His words) therefore our worship should be directed to the Holy Spirit/God and not any man. So to pray to or worship anyone but God is a form of idolatry. which again is in direct violation of God's law.

There is also relic worship. that is the empowerment of items deemed holy in that they retain power from the original user. This as people seeking things for salvation or relief and not God, again another form of idolatry.

I can understand how you could see those things as such. My point was that if people took the time to read the Catholic literature careful, they would be surprised at the contrast between what is formally teaches by the Roman Catholic magisteriate and what the laity practice. For example, saints, including Mary, and angels are NOT objects of worship.  You can find as much HERE. As for the priestly vows of celebacy I haven't given it much thought. You may be right or there may be subtleties of doctrine of which both you and I are unaware. Maybe they got that one wrong, but I don't think that is a core doctrine.

I've read that before. it basically trys and makes adoration the supreme form of worship reserved only to God where as the lessor forms of worship (supplication, confession ect are divided up by the demigod/saints..

Here's the problem... it wasn't till almost 750 years after chirst established that all worship be directed to God through His example of prayer, did some obscure group of men made this distinction and subdivide worship and what and where it could be directed.

If Jesus Christ was God.. Then why does He need to be corrected by this church consule 750 years after the fact?

Which only further proves my point.

One can't call yourself a follower of Christ if what you believe is based off a teaching of the church rather than a teaching of Christ.

Let's break down the Lord's prayer according to the three subcatigories 'worship' was made into by that church consule

Our Father Who art in Heaven Hollowed be thy Name, Thy Kingdom come thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. (Adoration)

Give us this day our daily bread (supplication)

Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors (confession)

Remember how this came about. The disciples ask Jesus to teach them to pray. all three forms of worship are exemplified in the Lord prayer. Meaning not only is prayer worship but if you do it right all forms of worship are exemplified in prayer directed to the Father.

This is what Christ taught. if you are a follower of Christ this is what you follow.

The church subdivided worship into three categories only giving God adoration (when Christ gave God all three.) giving certain saints supplication and other/the church itself the power of forgivness

Do you not see a difference between what Christ did and what you are doing?

---

(August 14, 2017 at 5:47 pm)Thena323 Wrote:

(August 14, 2017 at 2:29 pm)Drich Wrote: No.. I not saying one can not be saved and be a catholic I am simply pointing out why "we" (any of us) can not call ourselves Christian. That is a title only Jesus can award. we can only say we follow Christ or not. Even then that i not a prerequisite to salvation, as I can name a whole bunch of names of men who did not follow Christ but will be in Heaven.

Whoa....You mean you can name actual names? 
Been sneaking a peek in the Book of Life, haven't you? Admit it! 
I promise, I won't tell a soul.

Is Paul Bunyan in there? Dorian Gray? Jimmy Neutron? Please...tell me!
I just want...I mean, I just NEED to know that they'll be okay! Okay?

First names anyway and yes, I have snuck a peek of the book of life, inso far as what God shares of it.

Here's a statement quoting the Catholic Church about Mormon baptism:

The baptism conferred by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints cannot be considered a valid Christian baptism, said the Vatican's doctrinal congregation.
The ruling by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was published in the July 16-17 edition of the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, after being approved by Pope John Paul II.
While the Mormon baptismal rite refers to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Mormon beliefs about the identity of the three persons is so different from Catholic and mainline Christian belief that "one cannot even consider this doctrine to be a heresy arising from a false understanding of Christian doctrine," said a Vatican explanation of the ruling.
The notice, dated June 5, was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the congregation, and by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, secretary.
An accompanying article in L'Osservatore Romano said the ruling "changes the past practice of not contesting the validity of this baptism."


Damn, that is right there condemning all Mormons, ain't it?? Mormon beliefs aren't even heresy (!!!!) they are so far off the mark in their understanding of Jesus and therefore baptism. I see nothing in that statement that confirms the notion Mormons are Christians in the view of the Catholic Church.

(August 15, 2017 at 6:17 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Clerical celibacy is ecclesiastical law, not church doctrine.  They grant priests dispensation to marry, and there was a time that there was no prohibition whatsoever - it caused issues.

@Cath, juxtapose that with The Man Himself, (jesus, fyi) telling people that thoughtcrimes are sinful whether we act on them or not. Having a lust for peen, in your heart, is a sin, in and of itself..according to god - despite what the mormons or the catholics say on the matter to placate their gay parishoners and polite society.  It's a shame that the RCC turned into a bunch of PC cucks - but I guess that's what happens.

"FALSE TEACHERS FORBID MARRIAGE "is the crux of the highlighted passage in 2 tim.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09056a.htm is an explanation of where your ecclesiastical law comes from.

By the parameters Paul left to timothy that group highlighted can be considered as a false teacher because of their views on marriage.

(August 17, 2017 at 10:13 am)vorlon13 Wrote:

(August 15, 2017 at 4:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I already know.

Mormons currently believe that it is a sin to act on homosexual attraction, though having homosexual attraction in and of itself is not a sin because it is not freely chosen. They see gays as people equal in dignity and loved by God just the same as everyone else, as we are all sinners.

This is the same belief regarding homosexuality as the majority of Christian denominations. Mormons are no different in that sense.

TFTFY

Everything (literally) in the Mormon orbit is subject to change, as it has been since Joe Smith saw the blinding light in the woods in (pick one)  1817, 1818, 1819, 1820, 1821, 1822, 1823, or 1824.

(Joe Smith has claimed various years for the First Visitation and researchers have noted problems with all them contradicting known historical details and have proposed other years. The Mormon hierarchy claims all the conflicting dates and the greatly differing accounts presented by Joe Smith on different occasions are "remarkably consistent".  A skeptic might suspect Joe was telling so many lies and making up so much folderol that he was not able to keep track of it)

And there's Jo's Book of Abraham, which he supposedly translated from some scabby old papyri scroll. Unfortunately, poor Jo was out cleaver'd by some smart French bloke called Champollion who had learned the ancient Egyptian lingo. When Egyptologists looked at the scroll their verdict was unanimous; Fuck off! Its a funerary text, We've got loads of them.

One would expect that would be the end of it. But no, the Book of Abraham is venerated by those in the Moron church. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

(August 17, 2017 at 12:04 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Here's a statement from the Catholic Church about Mormon baptism:

The baptism conferred by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints cannot be considered a valid Christian baptism, said the Vatican's doctrinal congregation.
The ruling by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was published in the July 16-17 edition of the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, after being approved by Pope John Paul II.
While the Mormon baptismal rite refers to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Mormon beliefs about the identity of the three persons is so different from Catholic and mainline Christian belief that "one cannot even consider this doctrine to be a heresy arising from a false understanding of Christian doctrine," said a Vatican explanation of the ruling.
The notice, dated June 5, was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the congregation, and by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, secretary.
An accompanying article in L'Osservatore Romano said the ruling "changes the past practice of not contesting the validity of this baptism."


Damn, that is right there condemning all Mormons, ain't it??  Mormon beliefs aren't even heresy (!!!!)  they are so far off the mark in their understanding of Jesus and therefore baptism.  I see nothing in that statement that confirms the notion Mormons are Christians in the view of the Catholic Church.

What this means is that if a Mormon wants to convert to Catholicism, he must be baptized in the Catholic Church. Because Mormonism is so different from Catholicism, a Mormon baptism doesn't translate over like a protestant baptism would. 

This by no means indicates that Mormons are bad people condemned to Hell. Just that our faiths are different enough to where a Mormon who is converting to Catholicism would need to be baptized over again, in the Catholic Church.

(August 17, 2017 at 12:05 pm)Drich Wrote:

(August 15, 2017 at 6:17 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Clerical celibacy is ecclesiastical law, not church doctrine.  They grant priests dispensation to marry, and there was a time that there was no prohibition whatsoever - it caused issues.

"FALSE TEACHERS FORBID MARRIAGE "is the crux of the highlighted passage in 2 tim.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09056a.htm is an explanation of where your ecclesiastical law comes from.

By the parameters Paul left to timothy that group highlighted can be considered as a false teacher because of their views on marriage.

............?

I'm not sure you understood my response there........

Firstly, catholics do not forbid marriage - they greatly advocate for it..and babies...lots and lots of babies.  The reason that this prohibition was put in place was that a great many priests were using their position to enrich or enhance their children's lives and affairs.  This, I hope, to anyone's mind, is a misuse of such a position.  Partly in order to combat that..the church decided to set up their rules such that there was no opportunity for that grift. It's not part of their doctrine...they don't think that a preist -has- to be unmarried and celibate for any divine reason - it's a practical concern over good stewardship of the institution. They can change that rule at any time.

It's akin to the "Don't bring your fucking gun to church" rule. They're not "forbidding guns"...just strongly suggesting that the cathedral probably isn't the place to show off your shiny new pistol, for the same reasons that priests with baby daddy problems aren't going to be on their a-game. It, caused, problems.....lol.