Is this what mormons believe?

Originally Posted by Kristine1957
This website may help a bit. It "QUOTES " what many of the Mormon Presidents and Leaders have taught over the years.

nowscape.com/mormon/negro2.htm

PAUL G: Of course I have the read the quotes from this website. My purpose was for people on here to read what was taught by the early mormon church without having to post a long drawn out reply about blacks and the priesthood…etc…etc…

I’m not talking about you link that posts snippets I’m talking about the primary documents themselves. Many use such pages in place of their own research and knowledge.

For example, the quote attributed without reference to Joseph Smith below

"Had I anything to do with the negro , I would confine them by strict law to their own species and put them on a national equalization.’’

So lets have a closer look at it in context

At five went to Mr. Sollars' with Elders Hyde and Richards. Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I replied, they came into the world slave tally and physically. Change their situation with the whites, and they would be like them. They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Go into Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who rides in his carriage, and you will see a man who has risen by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of respectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined than many in high places, and the black boys will take the shine of many of those they brush and wait on.

Elder Hyde remarked, "Put them on the level, and they will rise above me." I replied, if I raised you to be my equal, and then attempted to oppress you, would you not be indignant and try to rise above me, as did Oliver Cowdery, Peter Whitmer, and many others, who said I was a fallen Prophet, and they were capable of leading the people, although I never attempted to oppress them, but had always been lifting them up? Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization. History of the Church, Vol.5, Ch.12, Pg.217

In your opinion what was the purpose of the snippet on your link using only the last sentence of total thought presented. What does the whole statement by Joseph Smith appear to be saying, to you.

Paul

That’s nice, Paul, and I agree with you that JS actually had a fairly enlightened attitude toward blacks for that time. But you must admit that his successor prophets and apostles have consistently been virulent racists. The quotes on that page from BY, JFS and the others illustrate this clearly.
Paul

Paul G: Forgive me if I didn’t understand what was posted by Gandalfthewhite It seems you would like references instead of a website and I was just trying to save time and space on here. :wink: Here is an example of one of the questions in post 11as far as the Africian people:

President Brigham Young states

" Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the Africian race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain the penalty under the law of God is death on the spot. This will always be so.

Journal of Discourses Vol 7, pg 209-91

Brigham Young took the view that curse of Cain was in effect, and taught that at some time in the future would be removed, so that the priesthood would conferred on all worthy male members. You judge him as we would one another today, I don’t think though that he was more different in this cultural norm than anyone else in the Country at that time.

Paul

Could you tell me where BY may have gotten these ideas and how they fit into what he was communicating?

Paul

I have no idea where Brigham came up with his ideas.:shrug: I do know that he was telling his followers since negro’s are from the seed of cain the white people better not be messing around with them.

OK, so can a dark skinned person become a priest or even a prophet and the president of LDS?

Mormonism Unmasked:

amazon.com/Mormonism-Unmasked-Confronting-Contradictions-Christianity/dp/0805416528

Blacks and the Priesthood
mormonthink.com/blackweb.htm#racistcomments

What does Mormonism teach?
carm.org/lds/lds_doctrines.htm

Curse of Cain?
Racism in the Mormon Church
utlm.org/onlinebooks/curseofcain_part4.htm

padfield.com/acrobat/sermons/mormonism.pdf

Yes, they can.

zerinus

As I remember Ed Decker has been quite sucessful at making converts using the god makers movie.

The cartoon really takes everything out of context and portrays Mormonism in a very poor light. You could do this with any religion. You could a cartoon emphasizing more bizarre or un-orthodox teachings and lampoon them.

Personnally I don’t think it’s fair, if you want to learn about Mormonism learn it from Mormons. I have posted on a Mormon message board and several Mormons constantly try to tell me what I believe and what the Catholic Church teaches. And if they fail they will take one sentence from some obscure priest in 1650 to prove their point. I find that to be unfair and frustrating to say the least, and frankly the protrayal of Mormonism here is unfair.

Yes I have problems with Mormon doctrine, but I will also engage a Mormon, and read their apologetics on the matter and make an informed decision. Rather than read anti-Mormon literature.

Would we as Catholics like Baptists claiming to know Catholicism from Jack Chick tracts?

Oh, that is very bad of Mormons to do that! Which board was that? I usually don’t visit LDS run boards, because I find Mormons debating Mormons a bit boreing. If I was there, I would have told them not to!

zerinus

I was wondering for preciselly this reason. I found this video by simple chance (I was looking at chant and got directent towards mormon chant and then from there to the video) and I wanted it to be varified.

What exactly is “anti-mormon literature”?

Think of “anti-Catholic” literature, then just input Mormonism instead of Catholicism. Ed Decker’s The God Makers for one is very anti-Mormon. And I’ve heard that touted on this topic several times.

I don’t know why Mormons follow someone like J. Smith, who drank too much & cheated on his wife… He kept trying to promote polygamy and his wife kept demanding that he stop promoting it. She even told him she would find herself a 2nd husband if he didn’t knock it off. Good for her… Although, myself, i would have just left his sorry — .
I’m sorry but my opinion is: What the heck is wrong with people, always chasing after these false prophets, false beliefs? I mean, whatever happened to common sense??
But this is what happens when people fall away from Christ… via falling away from the Church that He established.

I don’t know what anti-Catholic literature is either.

In the world of mormonism, mormons will call anything anti-mormon that doesn’t fall under what they have been taught. Including information that is factual, has been taught previously, and in some cases was taught by lds prophets and apostles.

For example, I left mormonism some 20 years ago, and what is in my head as what I was taught as what being a mormon meant, is now considered by the younger mormon set to be anti-mormon. So, am I anti-mormon just by the fact that at one time I actually believed what I had been taught?

I don’t think that knowing what mormons have believed is anti-mormon. It is useful information to have when considering whether or not that particular religion is something that a person would wants to be a part of.

Ed Decker, as inflammable as he is, has the same thing going on. These are the things he was taught, so therefore, believing them at one time and making a film about what he believed once…this makes him an anti-mormon?

For someone who is just learning about Roman Catholicism, I don’t see the same problem that the mormons have. I can read until I can’t stand reading any longer a lot of history about a very old religion. But no Catholic is denying the more difficult bits or calling it anti-Catholic.

As for the example of the Eucharist and cannibalism, that is exactly what I thought the first time I looked up the word transubstantiation. It wasn’t an anti-Catholic thought, not even a criticism. Just, from someone who was not familiar with the belief it does in fact look like ritualistic cannibalism. Especially when I have read about what it is cannibals believe is happening when they eat another human…aka, they are taking on their stronger attributes, and more to the point, taking on that person’s “power”. It took a lot more reading and attending Mass for a long time to really get what was going on with the Eucharist. And no, I don’t see the Eucharist as cannibalism any longer, but the ritualistic comparison is still very striking to me.

Plenty of ex-Catholic Mormons have done the same thing to me. For example many will bring up Church doctrine or at least percieved Church doctrinal changes such as Vatican II’s inclusion of protestants, Jews, and Muslims in salvation. But when “they were in the Church” the very idea was absurd. In fact they would quote Popes and ecumenical councils stating unequivically that the destination for the Jew or Muslim who dies outside the Church is eternal hell.

Many will show how the Church once practiced Latin and then changed the Mass to match more closely a protestant service. Many ex-Catholic Mormons will tell me how when they were little kids they were sold indulgences in parochial school by the priests and religious.

Just being an “ex” anything doesn’t give credence in my book. The most ignorant Mormons on all things Catholics are by far the ex-Catholic Mormons.

As an outside observer I can say someone like Ed Decker is an anti-Mormon. That doesn’t mean there can’t be a lot of truth in what he writes, but in the way he twists that truth and miscontrues certain doctrines to portray the Mormon Church in the worst possible light. Sort of like protestants who today in the 21st century constantly harp on the selling of indulgences by corrupt Bishops over 500 years ago.

Thanks, that is a very good explanation. Probably the best I’ve read to define “anti” anything.

I am ok with change. I like change. I would be more concerned about a religion that never changed, especially one that is 2000 years old.

My sense of it is that changes do occur in RC, but there are reasonable explanations. It isn’t like mormonism, where today this is taught, tomorrow it isn’t, and no explanation is provided, and in some cases there is a complete denial of previous teachings. Yet, I or anyone else can lookup and dozen places that shows where it was, but nothing that explains how it went from point A to point B.

I can read in depth theological discussion as to why things have changed in the RC Church. I can find the *reasons *behind them.

However, I don’t want anyone to get the idea that this is why I left mormonism. That really is peripheral and more of a personal annoyance than anything. I left because the whole religion, top to bottom, is built on the belief that Joseph Smith was a prophet. I do not have such a belief and never will.

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