Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 12:11:32 PDT
From:         Doug Gould <5315P@NAVPGS.BITNET>
Subject:      Modern Revelation and the Pope

Marty responds to Kerry regarding the pope, on

>Date:         Fri, 3 Apr 1992 14:25:39 EST
>From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
>In-Reply-To:  Message of Fri, 3 Apr 1992 11:24:31 EST from <KSTE@PURCCVM>

>Kerry,  When I read Jeff's posting I did not object to him calling St.
>Peter and St. Paul prophets, but I was going to object to him calling
>the pope a prophet, or even a claimed prophet.  The I got to your reply
>and saw you have the same misunderstanding.  Then I realized that a lot
>depends on how you define the word "prophet".  There is more than one
>definition in use.  My first thought was that a prophet is someone who
>receives revelation from God and proclaims it.  (This is not meant as
>a formal definition.)  In that sense St. Peter and St. Paul were prophets.
>However, the Catholic Church does NOT claim that the pope receives any
>revelation from God.  In fact, the LDS Church is the only one I know of that
>claims continuing revelation.  The Catholic Church teaches that public
>revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, St. John.  There will
>be no more public revelation that everyone must believe.

Marty, since you're a Catholic, I appreciate you confirming a couple of
things I've believed all my life:  (1) The pope does not receive revelation
from God, and (2) the LDS Church is the only Christian church that claims
modern revelation.  I just wasn't sure, until now, that Catholics would
agree with these statements.  Several questions come to mind: if "public"
revelation ended with the death of the apostles, who told the Catholic
Church there would be no more public revelations?  In my mind, this seems
to limit the Lord's ability to speak "publicly" to His people if He chooses
to do so.  Did He say He would no longer do so?  If so, that, in itself,
would be another public revelation, and should be canonized as scripture
along with the Bible.  If He did not say so, then who are we, mere mortals
(the pope included, without revelation) to make a definitive statement that
"there will be no more public revelation."  I hope you can see my point.
Your comments are welcome.

This is precisely the strength of the Mormon position, Marty.  We claim the
heavens are not sealed.  God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.  He
spoke to His people in Old Testament times, from the foundation of the
earth.  He spoke in New Testament times, through His disciples and apostles
who wrote by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost what constitutes scripture,
the word of God.  I agree with your definition of a prophet, and the fact
that Peter and Paul were prophets in that same sense--they received
revelation from God and proclaimed it.  Since He's the same God today, why
would He _not_ continue to speak to His children, as the need arises?
Surely we are in need of guidance from Him as much today as His people were
anciently.

Our belief in modern revelation is the one unique feature of The Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS, or Mormon) that distinguishes us
from all other Christian denominations.  We believe all that the Lord has
revealed to His chosen prophets in times past, and we welcome all that He
now reveals in these latter days.  And we believe He will yet reveal many
great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God here on earth.

Peace, and good will,

.+++++++++++++++++++++.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.
| Doug Gould          | Jesus: "Come unto me...my yoke is easy, |
| 5315P@NAVPGS.Bitnet | and my burden is light." Matt. 11:28-30 |
`+++++++++++++++++++++^+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU