What do Mormons think of Catholics?

[pammy]

Hello. Since I've recently moved to Utah and have had the opportunity to meet many many LDS people, I've gotten a variety of reactions from people who learn that I am a Catholic. I've heard everything from "That's wonderful. We share a belief in Jesus Christ." to "The Roman Catholic Church is the great abominable church which is presided over by satan and all its members are doomed to hell." I was told at the time that the latter was official LDS doctrine and that it had been revealed to a prophet at some point. So I am curious, are there any official LDS teachings about Catholicism? Does the church have a position on where Catholics go when they die? Is it to hell (as I was told by this person) or to the second best kind of heaven (as I understand from what I read)? Is it the church's position that the Catholic Church is "worse" than other denominations of Christianity? Just wondering.

[Snow]

Hello. Since I've recently moved to Utah and have had the opportunity to meet many many LDS people, I've gotten a variety of reactions from people who learn that I am a Catholic. I've heard everything from "That's wonderful. We share a belief in Jesus Christ." to "The Roman Catholic Church is the great abominable church which is presided over by satan and all its members are doomed to hell." I was told at the time that the latter was official LDS doctrine and that it had been revealed to a prophet at some point. So I am curious, are there any official LDS teachings about Catholicism? Does the church have a position on where Catholics go when they die? Is it to hell (as I was told by this person) or to the second best kind of heaven (as I understand from what I read)? Is it the church's position that the Catholic Church is "worse" than other denominations of Christianity? Just wondering.

The RCC is one of the world's great Church''s and deserving of much respect and appreciation. That's the Church's position. It's history is the basis of all modern Western civilization.

Any one who call the RCC 'the great and abominable...' these days is a backwards nut and a bigot.

When Catholics die, after a short stop over for processing, go to heaven.

[WANDERER]

Hi Pammy. I've clicked on a couple of sites from Catholics about the Mormon faith that are strongly worded and anti-Mormon. But I don't think all Catholics have the same sentiments. I'm not LDS so I don't feel qualified to answer on church doctrines but I have found that people are friendly, even if I do have an evangelical background.

[Daniel]

"The Roman Catholic Church is the great abominable church which is presided over by satan and all its members are doomed to hell."

Someone actually told you this in a conversation? As far as most LDS are concerned (except for the wingnut that would have told you the above) we are both followers of Christ and Children of God. By the way the Great and Abominable church is not one church in particular its symbolism for any church against the Church of the Lamb.

Daniel

Btw they may have gotten the notion that the Catholic Church was the Great Abominable church from a book that came out decades ago and was refuted by the First Presidency of the LDS Church.

[MsMagnolia]

The original reference to the Catholic church being the great and abominable church was made in "mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie.

The wikipedia tells the story of that book and the changes made to it.

"In 1958 McConkie published a book entitled Mormon Doctrine: A Compendium of the Gospel, which he described as "the first major attempt to digest, explain, and analyze all of the important doctrines of the kingdom" and "the first extensive compendium of the whole gospel--the first attempt to publish an encyclopedic commentary covering the whole field of revealed religion." He included a disclaimer that he alone was responsible for the doctrinal and scriptural interpretations, a practice unusual at the time.[4]

In writing the book, McConkie relied heavily upon the scriptures and recognized doctrinal authorities including, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, John Taylor, and Joseph Fielding Smith.[4]

On January 5, 1959, Apostle Marion G. Romney was assigned by President David O. McKay to read and report on the book. His report was delivered on January 28 which mainly "dealt with Elder McConkie's usage of forceful, blunt language; some strongly worded statements about ambiguous doctrine and matters of opinion; and the overall authoritative tone throughout the book, though in general Elder Romney had a high regard for Mormon Doctrine and felt it filled an evident need remarkably well."[4] The report concluded, "notwithstanding its many commendable and valuable features and the author’s assumption of ‘sole and full responsibility’ for it, its nature and scope and the authoritative tone of the style in which it is written pose the question as to the propriety of the author’s attempting such a project without assignment and supervision from him whose right and responsibility it is to speak for the Church on 'Mormon Doctrine.'"

Nearly a year later, after meeting to discuss the book, the January 8, 1960 office notes of McKay reflect that:

"We [the First Presidency of the Church] decided that Bruce R. McConkie’s book, ‘Mormon Doctrine’ recently published by Bookcraft Company, must not be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections to his book, and is now preparing another edition. We decided this morning that we do not want him to publish another edition."[5]

McKay called Joseph Fielding Smith on January 27, 1960 at 3:00 p.m. to inform him of the decision:

[McKay] then said: "Now, Brother Smith, he is a General Authority, and we do not want to give him a public rebuke that would be embarrassing to him and lessen his influence with the members of the Church, so we shall speak to the Twelve at our meeting in the temple tomorrow, and tell them that Brother McConkie's book is not approved as an authoritative book, and that it should not be republished, even if the errors...are corrected." Brother Smith agreed with this suggestion to report to the Twelve, and said, "That is the best thing to do."[4]

When the First Presidency met with McConkie about their decision, he responded, "I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want. I will be as discreet and as wise as I can."[4]

In his biography of his father, Joseph Fielding McConkie states that:

"On July 5, 1966, President McKay invited Elder McConkie into his office and gave approval for the book to be reprinted if appropriate changes were made and approved. Elder [spencer W.] Kimball [of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles] was assigned to be Elder McConkie’s mentor in making those changes. ... My father told me that President McKay had so directed him. In addition to that, I am in possession of handwritten papers by my father affirming that direction."[3]

The second edition of Mormon Doctrine, with its approved revisions, was published in 1966. Horne states, "The most obvious difference between the two editions is a more moderate tone."[4]

Another revision was made to the book in 1978 after Church President Spencer W. Kimball received the revelation on the priesthood being extended to all worthy male members.

Much of the Bible Dictionary included with the Church's publication of the Bible in 1979 borrows from Mormon Doctrine. For example, the entry for "Abraham, covenant of" in the Bible Dictionary is exactly the same as the entry for "Abrahamic covenant" in Mormon Doctrine except for one paragraph. Many other Bible Dictionary entries teach identical concepts with closely paralleled wording as corresponding entries in Mormon Doctrine.[4]"

I am sorry you have met some people who really have no idea what they are talking about. I am glad to see how wonderful your attitude is about this.

Just my thoughts,

Mags

[Aquinas]

Someone actually told you this in a conversation? As far as most LDS are concerned (except for the wingnut that would have told you the above) we are both followers of Christ and Children of God. By the way the Great and Abominable church is not one church in particular its symbolism for any church against the Church of the Lamb.

Daniel

Btw they may have gotten the notion that the Catholic Church was the Great Abominable church from a book that came out decades ago and was refuted by the First Presidency of the LDS Church.

The book in question, Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, is still in print (both hardback and paperback, and it has *never* been refuted by the First Presidency (though there was an effort to do so, but McConkie's father-in-law, Joseph Fielding Smith was rumored to have put the kabosh on such an effort).

And yes, this was the popular understanding of the Roman Catholic Church for many years in the LDS Church.

[Guest tomk]

Hello. Since I've recently moved to Utah and have had the opportunity to meet many many LDS people, I've gotten a variety of reactions from people who learn that I am a Catholic. I've heard everything from "That's wonderful. We share a belief in Jesus Christ." to "The Roman Catholic Church is the great abominable church which is presided over by satan and all its members are doomed to hell." I was told at the time that the latter was official LDS doctrine and that it had been revealed to a prophet at some point. So I am curious, are there any official LDS teachings about Catholicism? Does the church have a position on where Catholics go when they die? Is it to hell (as I was told by this person) or to the second best kind of heaven (as I understand from what I read)? Is it the church's position that the Catholic Church is "worse" than other denominations of Christianity? Just wondering.

Personally I think we should try not to put things in such black and white terms. To tell someone that "Mormons are the only ones going to heaven and everyone else is going to hell." I don't hold with that kind of thinking.

First of all, we believe that there are 3 degrees of GLORY -- into which the great majority of those who come to earth will end-up going to. This will not be an eternity of torture. It will be glorious -- even in the lowest Kingdom of Glory, the Telestial, people will be happy and content there. Wherever we end-up, we will be happy, and we will have the ministration of a member of the Godhead.

What Kingdom of Glory you end-up in is, well -- up to YOU. It depends on how loyal you are to Christ. Do you seek to be close to Him? Do you repent when you sin? If you are doing this you have no reason to fear. You will end-up where you will be the happiest, according to the degree in which you have sought a relationship with Jesus. If you did not get a chance to even find out about Jesus, provisions will be made so that you can find-out about Him and decide if you want to follow Him or not.

Heavenly Father really is in the SALVATION business -- He is not in the condemnation business. He is trying to lift and help and bless ANYONE who will respond to his loving invitation to "come unto Him."

In the Latter-day Saint belief system, we believe that 2 crucial elements to this salvation process, here on earth, is covenant making. And said covenant-making must be done under proper priesthood authority. Our church stands alone in possessing these ordinances and priesthood. That is our claim. But it does not matter what I believe to be true -- it matters more what YOU believe to be true. I cannot (and will never try) to CONVINCE you of anything -- for I lack the power to do so. I am just a man, and a fallen man at that. Only Christ has the power to convince you of the truth of these things through the power of the Holy Ghost.

I hope these comments help you out.

Good luck,

Tom

[NeuroTypical]

The book in question, Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, is still in print (both hardback and paperback, and it has *never* been refuted by the First Presidency (though there was an effort to do so, but McConkie's father-in-law, Joseph Fielding Smith was rumored to have put the kabosh on such an effort).

Aquinas has a rather, shall we say, selective view of the issue. Here is some source material, bolding added by me. You decide for yourself if Aquinas' take on the issue is sound or not.

The attached items are entries from Pres. David O. McKay’s office journalduring the period following Mormon Doctrine's original publication.

March 5, 1959: Elder Mark E. Petersen and Elder Marion G. Romney called at my request. I asked them if they would together go over Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s book, “Mormon Doctrine” and make a list of the corrections that should be made preparatory to his sending out an addendum to all members of the Church who have purchased his book.

--------------------

Jan. 7, 1960: 10:15 to 12:45 p.m. RE: The Book--”Mormon Doctrine”. The First Presidency met with Elders Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney. They submitted their report upon their examination of the book “Mormon Doctrine” by Elder Bruce McConkie. These brethren reported that the manuscript of the book “Mormon Doctrine” had not been read by the reading committee, that President Joseph Fielding Smith did not know anything about it until it was published. Elder Petersen states that the extent of the corrections which he had marked in his copy of the book (1067) affected most of the 776 pages of the book. He also said that he thought the brethren should be under the rule that no book should be published without a specific approval of the First Presidency. I stated that the decision of the First Presidency and the Committee should be announced to the Twelve. It was agreed that the necessary corrections are so numerous that to republish a corrected edition of the book would be such an extensive repudiation of the original as to destroy the credit of the author; that the republication of the book should be forbidden and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church. It was also agreed that this decision should be announced to the Council of the Twelve before I talk to the author. Elder Petersen will prepare an editorial for publication in the Improvement Era, stating the principle of approval of books on Church doctrine. A rough draft will be submitted to us for approval.

--------------------

Jan 8, 1960. The First Presidency held a meeting. We decided that Bruce R. McConkie’s book, “Mormon Doctrine” recently published by Bookcraft Company must not be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections in his book, and is now preparing another edition. We decided this morning that we do not want him to publish another edition. We decided, also, to have no more books published by General Authorities without their first having the consent of the First Presidency.

--------------------

Jan. 27, 1960: Conference with Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith re: Bruce R. McConkie’s book, “Mormon Doctrine.” At the request of the First Presidency, I called President Joseph Fielding Smith, and told him that we are a unit in disapproving of Brother Bruce R. McConkie’s book, “Mormon Doctrine,” as an authoritative exposition of the principles of the gospel. I then said, “Now, Brother Smith, he is a General Authority, and we do not want to give him a public rebuke that would be embarrassing to him and lessen his influence with the members of the Church, so we shall speak to the Twelve at our meeting in the Temple tomorrow, and tell them that Brother McConkie’s book is not approved as an authoritative book, and that it should not be republished, even if the errors (some 1,067 of them) are corrected.” Brother Smith agreed with this suggestion to report to the Twelve, and said, “That is the best thing to do.” I then said that Brother McConkie is advocating by letter some of the principles as printed in his book in answer to letters he receives. Brother Smith said, “I will speak to him about that.” I then mentioned that he is also speaking on these subjects, and Brother Smith said, “I will speak to him about that also.” I also said that the First Presidency had decided that General Authorities of the Church should not publish books without submitting them to some member of the General Authorities, and President Smith agreed to this as being wise.

--------------------

Jan. 28, 1960: 8:30 to 9 a.m. Bruce R. McConkie’s book. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. I reported to my counselors that I had talked with President Joseph Fielding Smith about the decision that the book “Mormon Doctrine” should not be republished and about handling the matter to avoid undermining Elder McConkie’s influence. President Smith agreed that the book should not be republished, and said that he would talk with Brother McConkie. It was decided that the First Presidency should inform Brother McConkie before he learns of our decision from some other source, so Brother McConkie was asked to come into our meeting this morning. When he arrived I informed him of the desire of the First Presidency with reference to his book not being republished, to which he agreed. The recommendation was also made that he answer inquiries on the subject with care. Brother McConkie said, “I am amenable to whatever you Brethren want. I will do exactly what you want. I will be as discreet and as wise as I can.” In answering letters he said that he would express no views contrary to views which the First Presidency has expressed. He said that he would conform in every respect.

10 a.m. to 2:45 p.m. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple. At Council meeting I reported to the Brethren our decision regarding Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s book “Mormon Doctrine,” stating that it had caused considerable comment throughout the Church, and that it has been a source of concern to the Brethren ever since it was published. I said that this book had not been presented to anyone for consideration or approval until after its publication. I further said that the First Presidency have given it very careful consideration, as undoubtedly have some of the Brethren of the Twelve also, and that the First Presidency now recommend that the book not be republished; that it be not republished even in corrected form, even though Brother McConkie mentions in the book that he takes all responsibility for it; and that it be not recognized as an authoritative book. I said further that the question has arisen as to whether a public correction should be made and an addendum given emphasizing the parts which are unwisely presented or misquoted or incorrect; but it is felt that that would not be wise because Brother McConkie is one of the General Authorities, and it might lessen his influence. The First Presicdency recommend that the situation be left as it is, and whenever a question about it arises, we can answer that it is unauthoritative, that it was issued by Brother McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it. McConkie on his own responsibility, and he must answer for it. I reported that the First Presidency had talked with Brother McConkie this morning, and he said he will do whatever the Brethren want him to do. He will not attempt to republish the book, nor to say anything by letter, and if he answers letters or inquiries that he will answer them in accordance with the suggestions made by the Brethren, and not advocate those things concerning which question has been raised as contained in the book. The Brethren unanimously approved of this. I then said that the First Presidency further recommend that when any member of the General Authorities desires to write a book, that the Brethren of the Twelve or the First Presidency be consulted regarding it. While the author need not get the approval of these Brethren, they should know before it is published that a member of the General Authorities wants to publish a book. I said it may seem all right for the writer of the book to say, “_I_ _only_ am responsible for it,” but I said “you cannot separate your position from your individuality, and we should like the authors to present their books to the Twelve or a Committee appointed.” I asked the Brethren of the Twelve to convey this information to the other General Authorities. On motion this became the consensus of the Council.

LM

[Abraham]

How can anyoone, let alone a LDS judge another. You have the right to worship as you see fit. (See Article of Faith # 11) Don't let some prideful moron try and judge you (judge not lest ye be judged).

Here in Denver we have an Inter-Faith Choir made up of Catholics, LDS, and others. Also, Catholic Chairites came to us (the LDS Church) and told us they had 15 semis refers full of salmon. We donated our cannery, and the I believe the cans, and LDS and Catholic volunteered side by side to can all the salmon and it ALL went to the Catholic food banks. Now wouldn't Father be proud? Now it is a regular event, whether the Catholics have food, or we work together just canning dry or wet food stuffs we work together like true Chritians should.

If we can't work together in love, support, and appreciations then I guess we can burn apart. I wonder how many LDS will be shocked and in awe that Sister Theresa makes it to the Celestial Kingdom, and maybe they won't. Think about it.

I have the utmost respect for what the Catholic Church has accomplished. We all have some skeletons in our closet, so let's not throw stones.

Regards,

Abraham

[pammy]

Thanks to everyone for the clarification and the info. To answer your question, yes, this person did bring this up in conversation (the subject of religion came up after this individual spied me with a big cup full of Starbucks). At the time, I knew even less about the LDS faith than I do now, but I still could not believe that this was actual official belief of any faith. I just could not swallow the idea that ANY religious group would single out another and say that they, specifically, would be punished for eternity for their beliefs. It just seems so hateful. I think that is totally different from thinking that one's church is the only true church. No big surprise that Mormons think this, because the vast majority of religions think this, including Catholics.

So even though I prefer to be a Catholic and feel that it is best for me, I think that even in the event that the LDS faith is the one true faith, I will still be ok. I believe in a loving God who will not look at me and say that I worshiped him incorrectly, and therefore must pay. I think he would give me credit for trying.

I told this to the person who said these things to me, and she laughed. She said I was foolish and that was just not how it worked. She said being Catholic, in and of itself, was a direct rejection of God and that unless Catholics repent for having been Catholic in the first place, they will not go to any of the 3 kingdoms of heaven. I decided to challenge this person, so I asked if she thought that Mother Theresa, a woman who lived a life of service and prayer and obedience and love of God, went to hell after she died. She told me that she most definitely thought Mother Theresa was in hell because it is unlikely that she would have renounced Catholicism after death because she was "very Catholic." It was then that I decided to just never talk about religion with this person again. I'm not the type to get into a fight. So instead of taking the word of people like her, I decided to learn about what your faith ACTUALLY teaches. So here I am. Thanks again, guys.

[batjerk]

Well, you're going to meet all kinds, and apparently, you have.

What "Mormons" believe about anything is up to the individual, just as is true from any other faith. What the doctrines of the Church are, is a different story.

Usually, "the Great and Abominable" statement is taken from 1 Nephi chapters 13 and 14 wherein Nephi is shown in vision the "Church of the Devil" being set up amongst the Gentiles and said Church removing "many plain and precious parts of the Bible".

There are many places one could look in early LDS Chuch history where leaders had given talks that pointed the finger at the Catholic Church as being the Church of the Devil, but this is likely nothing more than the popular hyperbole of the time as a great many Protestant preachers were saying much the same thing.

Since the Catholic Church is arguably the oldest extant Christian Church and had jurisdiction over whatever scriptures were around at the time, it is easy to draw the conclusion that this particular organization must be responsible for the changes to the Bible. That said, the Catholic Church, as presently constituted, did not exist at the time in question and is just as much a victim of the Church of the Devil as the rest of us are.

That, and the Church of the Devil is as much an abstraction as the Church of God, or Zion, as it is called. Both "churches" are omnipresent, and people, generally, are constantly switching memberships, as it were.

I happen to believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as an organization, is divinely appointed and is the only one that has authority from God to perform saving ordinances. This does not mean that any and all members of the organization are automatically saved, neither are all such who do not belong to the organization automatically damned. In fact, our very doctrines refute such an idea.

[Moksha]

The RCC is one of the world's great Church''s and deserving of much respect and appreciation. That's the Church's position. It's history is the basis of all modern Western civilization.

Any one who call the RCC 'the great and abominable...' these days is a backward nut and a bigot.

These are good words. We have to remember that any anti-catholic sentiment in the LDS Church, emanated solely from the hardliners already mentioned, who were basing their thoughts purely upon their own prejudices and these prejudices have been repudiated.

[Daniel]

I told this to the person who said these things to me, and she laughed. She said I was foolish and that was just not how it worked. She said being Catholic, in and of itself, was a direct rejection of God and that unless Catholics repent for having been Catholic in the first place, they will not go to any of the 3 kingdoms of heaven. I decided to challenge this person, so I asked if she thought that Mother Theresa, a woman who lived a life of service and prayer and obedience and love of God, went to hell after she died. She told me that she most definitely thought Mother Theresa was in hell because it is unlikely that she would have renounced Catholicism after death because she was "very Catholic." It was then that I decided to just never talk about religion with this person again. I'm not the type to get into a fight. So instead of taking the word of people like her, I decided to learn about what your faith ACTUALLY teaches. So here I am. Thanks again, guys.

Wow this person needs a lesson in social skills and get out of Utah. I live in a predominant Catholic area and get the same kind of thing. There are fundies in every religion, all I have to say is good thing I'm not one of them.

Daniel

Welcome to the board hope you enjoy it here.

Daniel

[Aquinas]

Aquinas has a rather, shall we say, selective view of the issue. Here is some source material, bolding added by me. You decide for yourself if Aquinas' take on the issue is sound or not.

The attached items are entries from Pres. David O. McKay’s office journal during the period following Mormon Doctrine's original publication.

LM

Daniel stated that a book, implicitly understood to be Mormon Doctrine, was refuted by the First Presidency. This is a statement of fact that does not hold up under scrutiny as there was never any sort of public refutation because as the quote that LM provided, the Brethren were concerned "and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church."

As a former member of the LDS Church, I attended four full years of LDS Seminary and Institute, and graduated from both. I also served a full-time mission for the LDS Church. So, when I say that this was a popular and widespread belief (I grew up in Southern California), the belief being what McConkie wrote in the First Edition of Mormon Doctrine with regards to the Roman Catholic Church, it is a fair and accurate (if unflattering) description.

Now, this certainly has changed...alot. When Pope John Paul II died a member of the LDS Church ward I live in called to express her condolences, knowing that I had converted to Catholicism only a couple of years before that time. And of all the churches that are out there, the LDS and Catholic are two of an ever dwindling number that believe in truth, BIG "T"...that is, the truth that does not change to appeal to modern sensibilities.

[JonboySquarepants]

i don't know if the lds church believes that the RCC is the great and abominable church, but it does believe all other churchs are wrong. lds believe that all other churchs are "wrong; and... that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: 'they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.'" so, i don't think it's just the RCC. all churchs other than the lds are wrong.

[havejoy]

If Mother Theresa doesn't go to Heaven then I sure as heck don't have much of a chance.

[Heather]

Sometimes I read posts like this and wish that I could've been in the same room and overheard the conversation. I'd love to have opened my big mouth on that one! But looks like Pammy didn't need anyone eaves dropping. I'm glad that you took a moment to seek out what LDS members really believe.

[JonboySquarepants]

what do you mean? almost everyone goes to a heaven. just not everybody gets to live with God.

[Alaskagain]

What do Mormons think of Catholics? (or is the question, what does the LDS Church think of Catholicism? )

My dearest friend of over 20 years is a Catholic. I think a lot of her! She is everything you would want a friend to be. She is honest, has great values, is spiritual and faithful in every aspect of her life.

I am sorry you have had this experience. "Love One Another".

[Moksha]

I went with my good friend SpecialSLC this last summer, to the book club at the Cathedral of the Madeleine for a review of Eliot's the Four Quartets. We attended the Mass right before the book club. I lit a candle for my friend GIMR who was feeling a might puny at the time. I even dipped my finger in the Holy Water and made the sign of the spiral. When it was time to take the Communion I went up front, but held my arms in the position of the Cross so that the Priest blessed me instead of my taking the host or the wine (only Catholics are supposed to do that). This seemed much nicer than just sitting like a lump (especially when there was no keyboard and monitor nearby).

All in all, it was a marvelous experience. I would invite all my fellow Mormons to experience such a Mass. The angelic voices of the children's choir is enough to make the experience worthwhile. I think by seeing those of differing faith traditions in action, that we can help forge an understanding and caring for one another.

[Snow]

The book in question, Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, is still in print (both hardback and paperback, and it has *never* been refuted by the First Presidency (though there was an effort to do so, but McConkie's father-in-law, Joseph Fielding Smith was rumored to have put the kabosh on such an effort).

And yes, this was the popular understanding of the Roman Catholic Church for many years in the LDS Church.

What do you mean refuted? The First Presidency certainly would not publish a refutation of a private opinion in a private book. The matter was dealt with privately and the revisions were made.

[Snow]

As a former member of the LDS Church, I attended four full years of LDS Seminary and Institute, and graduated from both. I also served a full-time mission for the LDS Church. So, when I say that this was a popular and widespread belief (I grew up in Southern California), the belief being what McConkie wrote in the First Edition of Mormon Doctrine with regards to the Roman Catholic Church, it is a fair and accurate (if unflattering) description.

Uh huh. Let me put it this way... as for me and my family (and those with whom we associated), we held no such beliefs.

[Elgama]

Uh huh. Let me put it this way... as for me and my family (and those with whom we associated), we held no such beliefs.

my in Laws (who live in Southern California) - certainly didn't, and their qualifications trump yours Aquinas lol

-Charley

[NeuroTypical]

Daniel stated that a book, implicitly understood to be Mormon Doctrine, was refuted by the First Presidency. This is a statement of fact that does not hold up under scrutiny as there was never any sort of public refutation because as the quote that LM provided, the Brethren were concerned "and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church."

I missed where someone claimed the book was publicly refuted. It was not. It was just that the entire quorum of 12 wished it had never seen the light of day and hoped there would be no reprints. They certainly made their refutation clear to each other, and seemed quite united in their opinion.

...this was a popular and widespread belief (I grew up in Southern California), the belief being what McConkie wrote in the First Edition of Mormon Doctrine with regards to the Roman Catholic Church, it is a fair and accurate (if unflattering) description.

Your experience mirrors mine - although probably my experience occurs a decade later. Some folks seem to think of it as "the book of Bruce" - an additional set of scripture.

To be sure, I think once the revisions were made, it was a mostly-correct book, and 95% of what's currently in it reflects accurately on what I believe. I used to use it when teaching Gospel Principles. When preparing the lesson, it was a handy book to have because it's organized by topic. I'd read what the book said, and if it had scriptures to back it up, I'd use it. If not, I'd usually not use it, or at most, identify "a lot of us believe x", and then ask the class what they thought.

And of all the churches that are out there, the LDS and Catholic are two of an ever dwindling number that believe in truth, BIG "T"...that is, the truth that does not change to appeal to modern sensibilities.

Hey man, if we mormons aren't right, Catholicism is the only other viable option IMO. And you can add me to the list of people who felt a loss at JP's death.

LM

[inthearmsofsleep]

The book in question, Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, is still in print (both hardback and paperback, and it has *never* been refuted by the First Presidency (though there was an effort to do so, but McConkie's father-in-law, Joseph Fielding Smith was rumored to have put the kabosh on such an effort).

And yes, this was the popular understanding of the Roman Catholic Church for many years in the LDS Church.

The first edition of "Mormon Doctrine" was published with the implication that the Roman Catholic Church was the "great and abominable church" as stated in the scriptures, but this was part of the gospel according to Bruce R. McConkie. The RCC contacted our church on this issue, and in short...the first edition stopped production. Later on, after working with general authorities the book was re-published with that thing about the RCC removed with the "stamp of approval" from this church. It IS still in print, but you will not find anything about the RCC under "Great and Abominable Church". If yours says anything like that, you might want to consider selling it on eBay