For former Mormons...

Do you take everything that comes out of the Magisterium as pure and unaulderated truth?

In my journey, I have come to take faith and reason hand in hand, but with that is the reality that we, as human beings, are subject to egos.

Do I take EVERYTHING that comes out thru the Magisterium as the ultimate truth? Honestly? No. ,understanding and accepting human ego, esp male human ego, prevents that…

I just dont accept that human beings, pope or others down the chain of “command” are exempt from possibily being, well…plain old wrong.

Mormonism taught me that, we, human beings, and males with egos, are subject to being, wrong…

Is there no reply from former Mormons? I have no doubt that they FULLY understand, exactly what I am asking, especially if they gave their ALL, their souls, everything about themselves to the LDS church?

There are no? former Mormons who get clearly what I am asking? none?

Do you have any examples of things you disagree with?

It seems like there are certain things that a Catholic ought not disagree with, such as ex cathedra statements, and things firmly rooted in tradition. Other than that there seems to be some room for disagreement.

Would you mind posting an example?

If I understand your question correctly, then my answer would be that the magesterium doesn’t just hand rulings out… they give biblical and/or Traditional reasoning for it. Of course it’s possible for error to occur, but that’s where the element of faith comes in. Luckily for us Catholics, our faith is reinforced by reason.

It could be anything that comes from the Magisterium. It’s the principle itself, that, because it comes from the Magisterium, it must be believed.

Do you think Jesus or the Apostles could be wrong? The Apostles were men after all.

Also, if you think the Catholic Church can be wrong, why be Catholic if there are things you don’t agree with?

Putting on my RC hat, I think the best response would be to say “The LDS is not led or inspired by the Holy Spirit as it is Apostate. The Church is Spirit led, and male ego, though it exists, cannot make God a liar or unfaithful. If God did not want it as doctrine then it would not be.”

I kind of agree with you though… one of the reasons why I am not RC. I think the Church is Spirit led, but I do not define the Church as Rome or those in communion with Rome. Rather, I see the Church as those who seek to follow the will of God, submitting to the authority of Scripture and the Apostle’s Creed. Know them by their faith, by their fruits, and by their love.

I’m not RC though, whereas you are. I find this a bit confusing… why not just become EO or Anglo-Catholic?

I haven’t been online much today. :slight_smile: Thought I’d browse a bit before heading to bed.

I know what you mean Marie. It is a matter of trust and questioning blind faith. That is the beauty of it though, as Catholics we aren’t called to a blind faith. If/when there is something that the Magisterium has promulgated, and you’re thinking, “uh, what?”…you don’t have to feel guilty for wanting to understand before you put your whole heart and soul into it. You can take the time to study, pray and come to understanding. Then is the point where once you do understand, you have the conscience decision to live according to what you understand. That is the hard part.

That is a great way of putting it, Rebecca. :slight_smile:
I cant speak of other former Mormons, but I left living with blind faith when I left Mormonism :wink: It was a great gift to let that go! :smiley:

Hi, haven’t posted in a while, but I’m
usually lurking.
Thought I’d respond to your post.
I would have a hard time following blindly any
human leader. As far as accepting magisterial
teaching, I haven’t come across one I have
disagreed with, yet. Like Rebecca said in her
previous post, there may be a teaching I don’t
understand, at first, or even all together, but after
doing some research, I’ve been able to come to
enough of an understanding that I can give my
ascent to it while I broaden my understanding f
Prayer plays more of a part in my process, because
I’m always asking God for understanding and
to lead me in my search for the truth. Catholic
TV and radio have also been good tools in this
regard. There are a bunch of smart people who
have taught me alot and helped me to understand
issues I’ve been struggling with. I’m always learning,
That’s been my experience, so far.

Well said! This is exactly what I meant.

Yes, I agree. :slight_smile:

The center is Jesus Christ. If you believe His Church did not fail, and that He has an interest in guiding us to truth, then there is a trust and faith in HIM.

In this way, Jesus works in and through us. The Church is like Christ Himself, human and Divine. Humans can and do sin. Jesus is divine and does not sin. Our faith is that in spite of our human failings, the Holy Spirit can and does guide us. Further, we know sin exists in the Church because we, ourselves, are in it. The Bishops who make up the Magisterium are human, not divine, but we also believe they are divinely guided by the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit’s guidance that is infallible.

I have never heard or been taught the idea, “when the Magisterium speaks, the thinking is done”. A friend taught me while I was in RCIA, the Church is authoritative, not authoritarian!

“On her part, the Church addresses people with full respect for their freedom. Her mission does not restrict freedom but rather promotes it. The Church proposes; she imposes nothing. She respects individuals and cultures, and she honors the sanctuary of conscience” (John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio par. 39).

The Magisterium proposes to us, the guidance that it has been given by the Holy Spirit. We are not coerced, as that denies how God has created us: free. Consider what has been proposed, and the development of your conscience changes. :slight_smile: In this way, the Holy Spirit works in all of us, as all of us are the Church.

Well, I’m a current mormon, not a former one, but I can try to respond:

  1. I’ve never given “my ALL, my soul, everything about myself” to anything or anyone besides Christ. No mormon ever asked me to do anything else.

  2. My wife is one of the wisest people I know, and she has a very relevant opinion about humans in positions of authority in any church: “I trust God to act like God, and man to act like man.” What is man? Who are the people in church priesthood? I’m guessing mostly they’re good people trying to do the best they can, even though all fall short. Just because God reveals things to a person, doesn’t mean he has made that person perfect, or altered their sinful fallen nature.

Does any of that make any sense?

Mormonism is founded on the belief that Christ’s Church failed. So, I don’t really know how you trust Jesus, based on what you believe about Him. Seems to me you have to believe that Jesus is just as fallible as humans.


When Christ set up His Church, did He intended it to be a community of believers? or the institution it has become?

And what about Peter? Did he envision his being left the keys of the kingdom as a community or an institution?

When I think of the church I view the Body of Christ, but not necessarily the intitution.

Make sense?

This post is not intended for you exclusively, Marie5890, but as a response to many of these posts in general. The following is from a book entitled; The Early Papcy to the Synod of Calcedon in 451. It was written by Adrian Fortescue and is available from Ignatius Press. “Papal infalibility is a negative protection. We are confident that God will not allow a certain thing to happen; that is all.” “Providence will see to it that the Pope shall never commit the Church to error in a matter of religion” (Pg. 47). In other words, our trust is in God.

Thanks for the reference, banjo. :slight_smile:

The Church is more than a community of believers. The hierarchy of the Church is not something separate. Jesus appointed Apostles and they appointed their successors. Certainly, policies and practices developed over time as the Church grew.

The magisterium isn’t some mysterious, back-room, group. It is a council of Bishops. They aren’t autonomous. They are dependent on the deposit of faith. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition can’t be changed. So, for the magisterium to even exist, it can’t be something that is non-apostolic.

And you should never discount sensus fidelium. :slight_smile:

"The Magisterium does not have an autonomous value: it receives assistance only when it keeps, interprets and defines the Revelation, of which it has been made a witness. Similarly, the Church has no power to create truth. this is why the subjective instinct of the faith should always seek expression in the objective setting of the truths, customs, rites and behaviour on which the Church agrees, and in the fellowship in space as well as time, which in its Councils, has always borne witness, using such terms as “This is what the Church believes, this is what she has always believed; it is what we have received from our Fathers and what we have lived by, faithful to their traditions.” – Yves Congar

Have you taken out your Endowment yet?

To Marie:

I think I get a sense of what you’re talking about. While both the LDS and Catholic churches require a certain “assent of faith” to teachings, I’ve noticed that the Catholic Church is much better at delineating exactly which teachings are dogmatic while the practice in Mormondom is essentially to take at face value anything and everything the Brethren say (that is until new Prophets and Apostles override them). Also of important distinction is the cultural expectations of understanding in both churches. In Mormondom, continually questioning a teaching of the LDS Church implies sin or apostasy. Why else would you be questioning the Church otherwise? I’ve never been made to feel this in regards to questioning Catholic dogma.

Well said, Rebecca.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit