MovieChat Forums > Latter Days (2004) Discussion > Are Catholics Christian?

Are Catholics Christian?


Searching the web for information on Mormons, I found the following statement:
"The reason Mormonism is not Christian is because it denies one or more of the essential doctrines of Christianity. Of the essential doctrines (that there is only one God, Jesus is God in flesh, forgiveness of sins is by grace alone, and Jesus rose from the dead physically, the gospel being the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus), Mormonism denies three of them: how many gods there are, the person of Jesus, and His work of salvation."
This is all fine and dandy, but Catholics do not believe that one is saved by grace alone. One must be baptised, first communion, and confess their sins to a priest in order to obtain absolution. Does that mean that Catholics deny one of the essential doctrines of Christianity?

reply

Intresting question. I'd never thought about it that way before.

reply

I think you jumped a theological barrier: you say "one is saved by grace alone" where your quotation says "forgiveness of sins is by grace alone." Not the same. Catholics just add the bit about needing a priest to dispense that grace. Don't get me started.

In my church (Presbyterian), Catholic baptism into the Christian faith is recognized (that is, if a baptized Catholic wants to become a presbyterian, he or she wouldn't have to be baptized again). Not true of Mormons: they must renounce their Mormon baptism and be baptized as Christians.

Not garnished? Not finished!

reply

Gimme a break, sirkitkat! (terrible joke intended) I'm afraid the statement you quoted is way off base. I'd be interested to know where you found it. It seems as though some exclusionist group, having ascribed their own definition to Christianity and declared that definition authoritative, is with that statement moving on to declare with this presumed authority whether other groups are Christian or not. I find it abominable that society offers publicity to such rubbish.

With just a little thought, we can reach a sensible conclusion about all of this.

The word "Christian" is a term that was introduced in Jesus' time. It was used, as the very linguistic root of the term suggests, as a way of referring to those who believed in and followed Jesus Christ. When applied to a religion, the term implies that Christ is central in that religion (usually as the Savior of mankind).

Christianity, then, by sheer common sense, includes all religions which teach people to believe in and follow Jesus Christ and to look to Him as their Savior for a remission of their sins. Any other meaning ascribed to the term is a matter of the internal doctrine of specific Christian religions, and is therefore unfit to be used as a yardstick by which to measure and compare religions.

Mormons are, by this definition, every bit as Christian as it gets. We do differ with other Christian religions on many doctrinal points. We believe, for instance, that three Gods preside over this Earth (God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost - the three together making up the Godhead), and that Jesus Christ and the Father He prayed to are two separate and distinct beings. But such doctrinal differences are inevitable - if we had no doctrinal differences with other religions we wouldn't be classified as a separate religion. Doctrinal differences with Christian religions does not equal a non-Christian religion.

[As a side note, I haven't the faintest clue why the statement you quoted indicates that we "deny His work of salvation." As far as I know, the doctrines of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (that's the actual name of "the Mormon church") are almost exactly identical to most other Christian churches on the topic of the Savior's atonement.]

Although I have deep disagreements with Catholic doctrine and religion, I nevertheless know that they do believe in and seek to follow Jesus Christ, and that they acknowledge Him as their Savior. They too deserve to be classified as a Christian people, regardless of the finer points of their doctrine.

JiminyC

reply

**Although I have deep disagreements with Catholic doctrine and religion, I nevertheless know that they do believe in and seek to follow Jesus Christ, and that they acknowledge Him as their Savior. They too deserve to be classified as a Christian people, regardless of the finer points of their doctrine.**

Thank you.





"FRA-GEE-LAY. That must be Italian!"
"I think that says 'fragile', honey."

reply

Christians only believe in one God though. Mormons for years have tried to reconcile that they do not believe in one God. The "one God" thing is pretty much the base of the Christian faith. You can't have 3 separate god godhead and then try to play it off as a poor mans trinity.

Mormons have piggy backed on top of Christianity, using the same terms and such. I have a feeling is Joseph Smith was born in a Muslim country it would use Muslim "lingo". It is clearly stated throughout the new testament that if anyone preaches another gospel other than the one written in this book (the bible) they should be eternally condemned. God stated in Hebrews that He is the same yesterday, today and forever. The need for new scriptures, according to the bible, is blasphemy. But how many new scriptures have Mormons released? I know of three, but there could be more now. And because they are "newer" they take precedence over the Bible. Years ago before affirmative action Black people and Native Americans (pretty much any non white person) were not allowed into the highest level of heaven, then they were allowed as servants, and then later (I believe so I'm not sure) they are allowed as full 'gods'. Mormons never admit to this, but it's what was taught in their scriptures (which are constantly being changed, not reinterpreted, but changed). The forefathers of Mormonism (Young and Smith) are quoted as saying that polygamy is foundational to being a Mormon, but once that became a problem for the church, it changed. Could you imagine what the first century church would have been like if the Christians then, whenever they came to a problem just changed what they believed? "You need to stop preaching that there is one God or we will burn you alive!" but they kept preaching. Mormonism has pretty much stolen Christianity, mutated it and continues to mutate it to this day. "Claiming the name of Christ" means nothing when you are not claiming the true Christ, the man that was all man and all God, the only God.

Like I was saying Mormonism changes all the time, the "thing" now is to try to line them as close as they can to actual Christianity, "actual" meaning only one God (a three in one God), Jesus was both all God and all man, Jesus was God not a child of God. Mormons can use all the lingo they want. Arguing semantics is one thing, you can say it's still a "christian doctrine" all you want but theologically the only thing that makes Mormonism any way shape of form close to Christianity, again this is theologically, is the people, names and places. But even those completely changed in the Book of Mormon.

I pray to God you can see the truth one day.

TomServo3500 bringing shame to his name since 2006.

reply

Same old trope the naysayers always drag out when they meet a Mormon...

I could spend half an hour blunting all of these already rather dull points, but let me take a different tack - a challenge. Any of you who want to deny others' religions the Christian label to which they claim a right, answer me these questions:

1. Since your definition of Christianity is, I think we can agree, not intuitively based on the word itself, who was the original author of your definition of Christianity?
2. Where did this author's authority come from?

If you can't establish a definition whose author had legitimate authority to define the word for all, then an intuitive or common sense definition, like the one I've proposed, is needed.

reply

By the way, let me suggest a couple of sources for your info search:

www.mormon.org
www.lds.org

These are official websites of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Mormon.org is geared toward those who aren't members of the church, and offers an outline of our basic beliefs, a chat tool for any questions you might have, and even free media offers (literature, scriptures and DVDs). LDS.org is geared more toward members, but could also be a great resource for someone such as yourself who is trying to find information on the church. I would suggest the "About the Church" and "Gospel Library" areas of the site, but look at whatever interests you. There is also a decent search tool if you're looking for something specific.

Jiminy

reply

My information was found at the following: http://www.carm.org/lds/lds_christian.htm
This should not suggest that I agree with it! Nor do I honestly think that Catholic dogma negates their status as Christians. I was merely confused becasue several people I talk to (and the information on said website) seams to define one as a Christian by believing in being saved by grace, and no kind of work, repentance nor detail seems to be necesary once one is saved. Mormons believe you must be "continually saved" through continual repentance of ones sins and doing various essential works to ensure salvation. Prodestant Christians seem to think this is unnecesary and therefore, unchristian-like. Am I wrong?

reply

No, you're absolutely right. Well, I can't really speak for your understanding of protestants, but your understanding of LDS doctrine on this issue is pretty good.

From The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, which we believe to be scripture additional to the Bible:
“For we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do” (emphasis added).

JC

reply

Granted that I'm a liberal/progressive (theologically speaking) Christian, but I'll warrant that that website http://www.carm.org/lds/lds_christian.htm is wayyyy biased.

I just hate to see that God gets put into such tiny boxes. That said, I agree with the conclusion that Mormons are not Christians, as long as we're going to stick with traditional definitions (you know, the way Mormons are so insistent that the "traditional" definition of marriage is the only correct one). Would Jesus recognize a Mormon (cf. Matthew 7 as referenced at the above web page)? Probably. But then I think Jesus would recognize a good Buddhist, or a good Jew, or a good Muslim... That puts me out of step with conservative christian theology, I know, but then it's not my job to play God, is it?

At that site, I also spotted this: http://www.carm.org/catholic/grid.htm Comparing Roman Catholicism with other "cults" like the LDS and Jehovah's Witnesses churches. Ya gotta laugh at the final tag line: "Eternity is a long time to be wrong."

Not garnished? Not finished!

reply


Just considering Mormon polytheism by itself is enough, more than enough actually, to classify the Latter Day Saints as non Christians.

Seems like, by definition, the Catholics (and the catholics) are Christians.

I might posit that the Lutherans are perhaps more Christian, but I don't want to go off topic here . . . .





reply

Again, I could have a doctrinal collision with you here, hammering out a hard-line rebuttal to what was a pretty unkind remark, but I don't see that going anywhere. Instead, I repeat the challenge I issued earlier: If you want to deny others' religions the Christian label to which they claim a right, answer me these questions:

1. Since your definition of Christianity is, I think we can agree, not intuitively based on the word itself, who was the original author of your definition of Christianity?
2. Where did this author's authority come from?

You may want to keep in mind that if you cite the Bible, there will likely be a difference in the way we understand the passage you use. Again, this is common among Christian religions.

If you can't establish a definition whose author had legitimate authority to define the word for all, then an intuitive or common sense definition based on the etymology of the word itself - a definition like the one I've proposed - is needed.

On a different note, I myself feel that it's really the people that are Christian, not so much the religion. Many religions teach and encourage people to become Christian not only in belief, but in heart, mind, word and deed as well. Those are the ones I feel truly deserve the title Christian. Although I feel the case could be made, I'm not arguing that as a part of the definition of the word. Just how I feel about it personally... thought I'd share. Do me a favor and don't pick it apart. Thanks :)

JC

reply

[deleted]

Quote:

"So Are Catholics Christian? Hell yeah! "



Well, we might want to drop the child molesters (and their protectors and defenders in the church) from that definition . . . .

reply

The doctrine of being saved by faith alone is the Lutheran heresy, condemned and anathematised by Ecumenical Councils and by The Vicar of Christ. Anybody that believes that goes automatically to Hell.



















Snobbery is a form of romanticism, the chastity of the perfectionist


reply

Well, one of Rick Perry's evangelical pals confirmed today that Mormons are not Christians. In fact he said right out loud that they're a cult. Who'd a thunk it?

"Nothing personal. Your name just happened to come up."

reply

Wasn't there a "South Park" episode in which the condemned souls who have arrived in Hell are told, "The Mormons were the correct answer"?

Oh, yes, there was:
http://theliberalmormon.blogspot.com/2008/08/mormon-news-mormons-corre ct-answer.html

Anyway, I'm waiting for Jesus (or God for that matter) to come down and say who's right. After all, Christianity has the Roman Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, the Lutherans, the Pentecostalists, and the Presbyterians. It has the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Seventh Day Adventists. It has the Baptists and the Southern Baptists. It has the Methodists, the Episcopalians, and the African Methodist Episcopalians. It has the Unitarians, the Universalists, and the Unitarian Universalists. And it has the evangelicals, the Quakers, and the Mormons.

In much of the past, they were warring with each other and burning each other at the stake. In gentler periods, they would have cold peaces and Great Schisms. You'd think that Jesus would be appalled at all the carnage and would come down and settle the matter, but evidently he can't be bothered.

I'm still waiting. My prediction is that no divine being will appear, and so people should treat each other with dignity and respect.

reply

My prediction is that no divine being will appear, and so people should treat each other with dignity and respect.

Why ever so, when nobody's watching?

If there is no God, then I can crush whomever bothers me, Stalin-style, and please myself.













Snobbery is a form of romanticism, the chastity of the perfectionist


reply

Why ever so, when nobody's watching?


Nobody's watching? Are you familiar with — police officers?

Man, using reason, has created man-made laws for the good of society.

If there is no God, then I can crush whomever bothers me, Stalin-style, and please myself.


If you are willing to risk spending the rest of your life in prison, or being executed (and then having your execution cheered by the audience at a Republican debate), try it. I recommend strongly against it, obviously.

But do you think that any god, goddess, or godling is going to stop you? Did God stop all of the carnage between the religious sects? Did God stop the Nazis from killing millions of Jews? (And, under the standard doctrine of Christianity, the Jews who were gassed woke up in Hell afterward, because they did not believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior. That must have been a bummer.) Is there also an animalian hell for, say, the sharks who attack and kill children at the beach?

Did God even stop Stalin?

Besides, if you believe in predestination — a tenet of at least one particular Christian sect, the Calvinists — it doesn't matter anyway. The thing about the Bible is that it's such a contradictory muddle that one can find passages to support or refute anything, but consider Romans 9:14-18:

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.


And don't bother complaining about the confounded unfairness of it all, as Paul said in the next three verses:

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?


Look — it would be great to have a control on human behavior by having a system that declares that misconduct will result in eternal damnation. The problem, however, is that experience has not borne out the efficacy of such a system. There are multiple religious faiths out there, and the divinity (or divinities) are apparently too busy to stop by Planet Earth and say what the right answers are. The holy books are dense and contradictory, with specific passages invoked as gospel one century and dismissed as having been "misinterpreted" in another.

The Biblical passages about homosexuality are examples of passages that are cited as the law from on high by one group and dismissed or ignored by another group.

There are indeed people who control their behavior for the better because of religious faith, but there are also those who engage in misbehavior because of religious faith. I am just sick and tired of people invoking the Big Man in the Sky to kick other people down, and, when hearing a complaint, say something to the effect of, "You'll just have to take it up with God."

I say, "Why can't God come down and fix the problem Himself?"

Perhaps the best words on the subject are those of Nobel Prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg:

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

reply


So the police is the source of all morality. Interesting ethic.

















Scostatevi profani! Melpomene son io...


reply