Cheryl: “…nobody thinks to question Catholic Theology when half their clergy turn out to be child molesters?”

I know for a fact that people have and do question Catholicism, Catholic theology, Catholic policy on celibacy, etc. in general, and specifically because of the abuse scandal. Why is there this urge to see every slight as some widespeard pattern of abuse in society’s treatment of Mormons? O’Donnell’s tirade was nonsense, and many non-Mormons saw his rant for what it was. But I don’t think many people (except Hugh Hewitt, of course) will buy into the paranoid notion that O’Donnell is just one part of society’s drive to attack Mormon religious people but no other religious people.

CJ: “when you realize that your church’s history is nearly impossible to explain?”

I don’t think it’s impossible to explain. It may be very hard to *believe* the first time to hear it, but when you hear the story told in a serious way it’s not easy to reject either. Hitchens and O’Donnell probably have fine, glib answers to explain the number of witness to key events of the Restoration, but that’s because they’re committed themselves to opposing Mormonism. This thing was not done in a corner, nor did Mormonism come purely out of Joseph Smith’s head. There were a multitude of sober-minded participants who didn’t and don’t bear the marks of fanaticism and obscurantism.

But I wholeheartedly agree that other denominations couldn’t hold up to the same scrutiny.

I think the anti comments that bother me the most are the ones which have the potential to reach the greatest number of people.

However, while satan is at work, so is Heavenly Father. We just need to keep our eyes, ears and when need be, our mouths open, in order to do our bit.

And one last thing….I think we need to give people a little more credit. I think the majority of people recognise that an anti-mormon person may not be the best source for information on Mormons. True, they may be influenced by the comments but all of that would be undone in an instant upon meeting and speaking with a member.

I apologize for offending. That was not my intention.

In terms of a face to face confrontation (my summer work mate was not outwardly belligerant, just subtley annoying) I remember doing a neighborhood “missionary blitz” with all the missionaries from our district and encountering a group of evangelicals who were all engaged in helping one of their friends move (sound familiar?). It seemed as though they were waiting for us as they all went into the house and got their Bibles and then started a debate. At the end of the discussion I challenged them to seek the truth and when they learned that the things they had been told about our church were false, they might consider the motivation of the one who told them that false information. I was somewhat surprised at how calm I was in this situation.

What do you do when in spite of your unwavering conviction through real spiritual experiences, you realize that your church’s history is nearly impossible to explain ?

It’s not impossible. Just ask Richard Bushman. You just have to take a deep breath and deal with one issue at a time. With a guy like O’Donnell, it seems impossible because he comes at you with so much all at once. Take his distortions one at a time and they all fall apart under scrutiny. His demeanor exposes him as a demagogue, and he ends up causing people to have sympathy for us rather than buy into what he says. Think about it, when have you ever believed a word from anyone who behaved like that?

I can’t recall a time when somebody said something that I felt challenged my faith. Oh, yeah, it was in Sunday School last week when my annoying neighbor bothered me by a comment she made.

But I don’t think I’ve ever been called on to defend the faith. Maybe I am now and I’m failing that call. Geez, so much to think about.

If somebody started spouting some of the crap they spout about us, say, on the plane, I’d say, “that’s crap. You don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.”

I’m not joking, that’s probably what I’d say. It’s not the right thing, obviously, but there you have it.

I’m actually wishing Mitt hadn’t run for president because I’m getting so mad at the those who throw cheap shots in ignorance.

I can’t recall a time when somebody said something that I felt challenged my faith. Oh, yeah, it was in Sunday School last week when my annoying neighbor bothered me by a comment she made.

But I don’t think I’ve ever been called on to defend the faith. Maybe I am now and I’m failing that call. Geez, so much to think about.

If somebody started spouting some of the crap they spout about us, say, on the plane, I’d say, “that’s crap. You don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.”

I’m not joking, that’s probably what I’d say. It’s not the right thing, obviously, but there you have it.

I’m actually wishing Mitt hadn’t run for president because I’m getting so mad at the those who throw cheap shots in ignorance.

What does one thing have to do with the other?

“…sorry to the Catholics, I’m not trying to single you out!”

actually you are.

On behalf of my Catholic extended family, this LDS guy respectfully disagrees with your points.