Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< >>>" And the way that many Mormons have reacted in these threads only serves to re-affirm peoples' suspicions."<<< What way would that be? >>> See #2, #4, #5, and #115 in this thread.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Mormons don't sit in church learning how to become gods and govern their own planets. These kinds of beliefs are secondary, or even tertiary, to much more core beliefs about family, how to be better people, how to live clean lives, how to apply the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus to their lives, etc. These other topics don't come up too often at all, in my experience. So while Evangelicals use those beliefs to highlight differences and point out why Mormons are not mainstream Christian, or not Christian at all, they really miss crucial details and opportunities to truly understand the faith. >>> This is perhaps one of the most insightful comments in this thread. I think you're absolutely right. The same thing can be said for most religions. Take for example how some Fundamental Christian denominations are so insistent on the belief in things such as a literal interpretation of Genesis, a 5000-6000 year old Earth, man having lived side-by-side with dinosaurs, and so on. I realize that people that hold those beliefs derive them from a literal interpretation of the Bible. But, how do those beliefs have anything to do with daily life, about being a good person, or even about salvation through Christ? It would seem that the answer would be "very little," yet an inordinate amount of time and effort is spent in some churches on such matters. The Mormon beliefs that many outsiders think are odd yet Mormons take in stride appear that way simply because Mormons were brought up believing them and just accept them without too much thought one way or the other, just as is done with other beliefs in more mainstream Christian denominations.
Originally Posted By dlkozy >>>"<<< >>>" And the way that many Mormons have reacted in these threads only serves to re-affirm peoples' suspicions."<<< What way would that be? >>> See #2, #4, #5, and #115 in this thread."<<< I went back and checked the threads that you listed so that I could try and understand where you are coming from #2-been removed-I don't know who said and what and so I can't respond to that post #4-Sacred/Secret. We believe that the temple is a sacred place. Those that live according to LDS doctrine can attend. To keep it sacred, we don't speak lightly of it. To you it might seem secretive, to us it is sacred. #5-Josh said he misspoke-did you happen to see that post? #115-That was a post from you. Did you mean a different post? So, after reading the posts you referred to-I still do not understand your statement.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<**I am not overly familiar with all aspects of Catholicism but I believe that a Priest is required for many such life cycle rituals as well as formal worship, no?** The sacraments though, I think must be done by a priest.>> Deacons can perform the Sacraments of Baptism. The Sacrament of Marriage is conferred by the Bride and Groom (to each other), the celebrant's (Priest or Deacon) job is to basically supervise. Holy Orders can only be conferred by a Bishop. Confirmation, Reconciliation, Eucharist and the Sacrament of the Sick (annointing) can be done by a Priest or Bishop. Also, lay people can lead in a Eucharistics celebration if a Priest is not available, assuming that previusly consecrated hosts are available. Hosts that are not consumed at a Mass are stored in the Church's tabernacle. When you see Catholics enter a Church they will genuflect toward the tabernacle before sitting down. This is only done when the tabernacle contains consecrated hosts, which is indicated by a burning candle next to the tabernacle. Usually when the tabernacle is empty it is unlocked with its door(s) left wide open.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<The Sacrament of Marriage is conferred by the Bride and Groom (to each other), the celebrant's (Priest or Deacon) job is to basically supervise.>> Also, most weddings are combined with a Mass, which is the Priest's job.
Originally Posted By jonvn I was at a wedding like that once. I think it was the longest thing I've ever had to sit through...
Originally Posted By Mr X **When you see Catholics enter a Church they will genuflect toward the tabernacle before sitting down. This is only done when the tabernacle contains consecrated hosts, which is indicated by a burning candle next to the tabernacle.** Wow, I never knew that, and was never taught that. Weird (and I went to Catholic school even!). I thought it was just something you did towards the alter as a gesture of respect or whatever.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip **When you see Catholics enter a Church they will genuflect toward the tabernacle before sitting down. This is only done when the tabernacle contains consecrated hosts, which is indicated by a burning candle next to the tabernacle.** It depends on the church. The last Catholic Church we were members of it was not the custom to kneel at any point during the service. Of course our priest was something of a radical; accepting female deacons, praying every week for inclusiveness of "gay, lesbian and transgender people", and other good stuff. Others referred to our church as that "almost Catholic Church".
Originally Posted By Mr X Sounds like an awesome priest. Hope he didn't get in too much trouble with the powers that be!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Hope he didn't get in too much trouble with the powers that be!>> They tolerated him because he built a parish that started with a meeting in someone's living room into one of the largest Catholic Churches in Minnesota with over 5,000 families. Sadly he retired a couple of years ago, and the diocese assigned a very traditional priest to replace him. We then requested to have our membership dropped from their records (as did many others).
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<It depends on the church. The last Catholic Church we were members of it was not the custom to kneel at any point during the service. Of course our priest was something of a radical; accepting female deacons, praying every week for inclusiveness of "gay, lesbian and transgender people", and other good stuff. Others referred to our church as that "almost Catholic Church".>> There are Churches out there that use the name "Catholic" but are not in Communion with the Holy See. Some are fundamentalist, and insist that there has not been a valid Pope since Pius XII. They still do the Mass in Latin andf the Priest has his back to the assembly during Mass. I recall a 60 minutes interview with one of these groups some years ago. The journalist basically summed up their position with " so you guys think that you are more Catholic than the Pope?" Others are just the opposite (as in liberal). Deacons are ordained by the Bishop, not the Priest, so if they had female Deacons, then they were again probably not part of the local Diocese and not in Communion with the Holy See. They often meet in temporary locations: auditoriums, in a Protestant Church, etc. I have also noticed that these come and go. There used to be one out here that was called "St. Francis Independent Catholic Church". It folded after a couple of years. The Fundamentalist groups are more resilient. One of them even built a proper Church (St. Isidore's) and invited Archbishop Chaput to the dedication. He did not attend, and St. Isidore's does not appear in the Archdiocese parish directory.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Hope he didn't get in too much trouble with the powers that be!>> Not likely, his Church was probably independent. Or he probably had a very liberal Bishop at the time. Of course, even liberal Bishops don't ordain female Deacons. I'm still guessing that the parish wan't RCC.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<They tolerated him because he built a parish that started with a meeting in someone's living room into one of the largest Catholic Churches in Minnesota with over 5,000 families.>> So how did he manage to get female Deacon's? The local Bishop could have been defrocked by the Pope for allowing that.
Originally Posted By MOLLYSMOM To utahjosh and tiggertoo...thank you for the sensitive words concerning the situation that happened to my daughter. It makes me feel less troubled by the whole situation. While I still feel some anger at those who chastized her, I am glad to know that this is NOT the norm. tiggertoo...you suggested speaking to the bishop. My father in law and brother in law were bishops in the Mormon church at one time. My father in law spoke with the bishop of the church where this occurred, and unfortunately, he was told much the same as my daughter was. He was appalled at the response he received, and could not apologize enough to her. I think that perhaps the problem was with THAT particular church and THAT particular bishop. Not long after, my daughter's friend told her that they could no longer be friends because my daughter was not Mormon and she would never be accepted into the kingdom of God. Sad to say the least.
Originally Posted By utahjosh Mollysmom, you're welcome. Nobody should be treated that way. <Not long after, my daughter's friend told her that they could no longer be friends because my daughter was not Mormon and she would never be accepted into the kingdom of God.> This is terrible, and not encouraged by the LDS church doctrine, leaders, or anything. You have bad apples in every bunch. But generally I'm pleased with the fruits of the LDS Church.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<So how did he manage to get female Deacon's?>> My guess is that they were referred to deacons but actually weren't. Under the new administration she is apparently a 'Pastoral Ministry Specialist': <<Pastoral Ministry Specialist Mary Ann supports the pastoral care of our community, working closely with Deacon Al, Father Kennedy, and Father Bill. She collaborates with community members and staff to provide welcoming, life-giving pastoral ministry at Pax Christi.>>
Originally Posted By jonvn "Not long after, my daughter's friend told her that they could no longer be friends because my daughter was not Mormon and she would never be accepted into the kingdom of God." That is disgusting. I can't imagine a proselytizing church like LDS doing that as a general rule. That is counter productive. But who knows....logic doesn't enter into a lot of this stuff.
Originally Posted By Mr X **So how did he manage to get female Deacon's? The local Bishop could have been defrocked by the Pope for allowing that.** The priorities for these groups really astounds me sometimes.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <"Not long after, my daughter's friend told her that they could no longer be friends because my daughter was not Mormon and she would never be accepted into the kingdom of God." That is disgusting. I can't imagine a proselytizing church like LDS doing that as a general rule. > You're right, jonvn. I called it terrible in post 176. There is no encouragement of any sort in the LDS Church to treat people that way. In fact, in his last speech at BYU, President Hinckley said the following: "We believe in doing good to all men. ... All men deserve our respect... God is no respecter of persons. All are deserving of our consideration. Love and mercy must be the foundation principles of our relationships." <a href="http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=11938&x=50&y=8" target="_blank">http://speeches.byu.edu/reader /reader.php?id=11938&x=50&y=8</a>
