What are the roles of different titles? I understand the guy I call a bishop is more like a Catholic pastor.
What is the Pope's role? Is he a steward or figurehead standing in during the absence of apostles?
The LDS believe that God, Christ, and the holy ghost are three distinct beings.(Though sometimes hard to distinguish in religious texts.) How does this compare to the Catholic belief?
What is the official(Rather than personal.) Roman Catholic belief on the purpose of life? Why are we here?
I'm sure I had others... but you know, now that I have a chance to ask them they've all hidden. :/
What is the Pope's role? Is he a steward or figurehead standing in during the absence of apostles?
The LDS believe that God, Christ, and the holy ghost are three distinct beings.(Though sometimes hard to distinguish in religious texts.) How does this compare to the Catholic belief?
What is the official(Rather than personal.) Roman Catholic belief on the purpose of life? Why are we here?
I'm sure I had others... but you know, now that I have a chance to ask them they've all hidden. :/
It'll take me a couple comments to answer all these.
If LDS bishops are the ministers and administrators of their individual temple communities, then they are the same as pastors.
The Church's hierarchy is surprisingly flat (and getting flatter through Francis I's current reforms) when compared to most modern bureaucracies, but there are auxiliaries (the monastic and lay orders) that complicate it. For the people that undertake Holy Orders (the sacrament of entering the priesthood), they enter the church as priests. At that point they could also choose to join an order, as Pope Francis did when he became part of the Jesuits years ago. That's entirely up to them, and has no real bearing on their work in the diocese (a collection of parishes). The next level of authority is bishop, the one who leads the diocese. The penultimate level are the cardinals.
The Papacy is a stewardship role that originates in the very colorful early Christian politics more than doctrine. In the early Church the bishop was the leader of the Christian communities in certain regions, but once Christianity was adopted as the official religion of Rome there were factions that expected an international and central leadership. In particular, the Bishop of Rome considered themselves the successor to the mission Christ entrusted to St. Peter and the natural choice for the Church's leader. Other Bishops didn't agree, and in about 1064 the Great Schism split Christianity into East (Orthodoxy) and West (Roman Catholicism). The Bishop of Rome took the role of the western Church's leader, and became known as the Pope.
Since they are both the Bishop of Rome and spiritual leader of the planet's Roman Catholics, their addresses always start with the latin phrase 'Urbi et Orbi'--City and World. There's a common misconception that everything the Pope says has to be taken as infallible because of this, and that isn't true. Papal Infallibility can only be invoked under certain guidelines on articles of faith, or significant spiritual or moral matters, for the whole church. It's only been invoked once, by Pius IX who established it and declared that the Assumption of Mary into Heaven is core belief. It might seem like an odd topic to invoke infallibility over, but at the time there was a hot debate about the significance of Mary and women in general in Christianity; and making the Assumption of Mary dogmatic reinforced that women and their contributions to Christianity cannot be disregarded.
If LDS bishops are the ministers and administrators of their individual temple communities, then they are the same as pastors.
The Church's hierarchy is surprisingly flat (and getting flatter through Francis I's current reforms) when compared to most modern bureaucracies, but there are auxiliaries (the monastic and lay orders) that complicate it. For the people that undertake Holy Orders (the sacrament of entering the priesthood), they enter the church as priests. At that point they could also choose to join an order, as Pope Francis did when he became part of the Jesuits years ago. That's entirely up to them, and has no real bearing on their work in the diocese (a collection of parishes). The next level of authority is bishop, the one who leads the diocese. The penultimate level are the cardinals.
The Papacy is a stewardship role that originates in the very colorful early Christian politics more than doctrine. In the early Church the bishop was the leader of the Christian communities in certain regions, but once Christianity was adopted as the official religion of Rome there were factions that expected an international and central leadership. In particular, the Bishop of Rome considered themselves the successor to the mission Christ entrusted to St. Peter and the natural choice for the Church's leader. Other Bishops didn't agree, and in about 1064 the Great Schism split Christianity into East (Orthodoxy) and West (Roman Catholicism). The Bishop of Rome took the role of the western Church's leader, and became known as the Pope.
Since they are both the Bishop of Rome and spiritual leader of the planet's Roman Catholics, their addresses always start with the latin phrase 'Urbi et Orbi'--City and World. There's a common misconception that everything the Pope says has to be taken as infallible because of this, and that isn't true. Papal Infallibility can only be invoked under certain guidelines on articles of faith, or significant spiritual or moral matters, for the whole church. It's only been invoked once, by Pius IX who established it and declared that the Assumption of Mary into Heaven is core belief. It might seem like an odd topic to invoke infallibility over, but at the time there was a hot debate about the significance of Mary and women in general in Christianity; and making the Assumption of Mary dogmatic reinforced that women and their contributions to Christianity cannot be disregarded.
Ah! So the Pope is a dual title. It is both bishop of Rome and leader of the whole church. I bet it keeps him busy!
*Sigh* Sexual inequality. A recurring problem. I think Pius IX made a good choice.
Hierarchies are never simple, are they? XD The LDS church is organized a lot like a typical republic. Leaders of small areas called 'wards' are called Bishops. Several wards make an area called a 'stake' led by a Stake President. Several stakes make up an 'area', led by a council called an 'Area Quorum of Seventy'. All of the area seventies report to a single major 'Quorum of THE Seventy'(Referring to THE seventy or A seventy can be confusing.). Finally THE Seventy report to the General Presidency, which is the prophet and two counselors.
Then to muddy the water a bit there are different groups and roles that report to each of these levels of the hierarchy. Most notable is the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who report to the General Presidency. Should the need arise the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles can(As a unanimous group.) overrule the decision of the General Presidency on a matter.
Sorry, I babble. I think my next question was about the Roman Catholic Church's stance on the nature of God. LDS belief is that God, Christ, and the Holy Ghost are individuals working together. How does this compare?
*Sigh* Sexual inequality. A recurring problem. I think Pius IX made a good choice.
Hierarchies are never simple, are they? XD The LDS church is organized a lot like a typical republic. Leaders of small areas called 'wards' are called Bishops. Several wards make an area called a 'stake' led by a Stake President. Several stakes make up an 'area', led by a council called an 'Area Quorum of Seventy'. All of the area seventies report to a single major 'Quorum of THE Seventy'(Referring to THE seventy or A seventy can be confusing.). Finally THE Seventy report to the General Presidency, which is the prophet and two counselors.
Then to muddy the water a bit there are different groups and roles that report to each of these levels of the hierarchy. Most notable is the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who report to the General Presidency. Should the need arise the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles can(As a unanimous group.) overrule the decision of the General Presidency on a matter.
Sorry, I babble. I think my next question was about the Roman Catholic Church's stance on the nature of God. LDS belief is that God, Christ, and the Holy Ghost are individuals working together. How does this compare?
I get asked about the Trinity fairly often when discussing religion with the muslim groups on campus. Since they speak of Allah without divisions it seems very odd that Christians do that. Catholics believe that God, Christ and the Holy Spirit are the same divine presence. I like to think of it like clay or dough, instead of 3 seperate blobs it's one big blob that has 3 more defined lobes sticking out from it. They are still connected, but you can recognize the lobes from a distance.
On your last question I had to call in some help from a theologist friend because the canon is quite a labyrinth. She helped me find this passage out of the Baltimore canon: "6. Q. Why did God make you? A. God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next." According to canon, our relationship with God is what orients our lives. In fact, this is what she offered for summary: "Basically: our lives are oriented to be in relationship with God, to love and be loved by God (God loves us unconditionally), to do good by doing His will in this life, and by our doing His will in this life we enjoy the fullness and perfection of that relationship with Him in heaven."
Sounds nice and simple in theology, doesn't it? The aspect of Catholicism that does the fleshing out of this is cultural.
Essentially, for Catholics there's a sort of spiritual dynamism to our lives. The commandments, teachings and the exhortation to apply and develop our talents to better the world are markers we always need to be striving for; and that pushes us forward. That's what prayer and reflection can be for, to help us open our hearts and understand what we still struggle with. Then we need to take steps to change that.
Of course, even with God's help there are challenges in application. One issue that has become a major point of discussion as our scientific exploration of the brain and body continues is mental illness. Anxiety, depression and many more conditions are legitimate and to be taken seriously in medicine, science and society; because among other things they are crushing barriers to our spiritual development. Suicide, cutting, eating disorders and other terrible things are not sins because of that, it's a call to other people to be Christians and support them when it comes to getting help and treatment.
On your last question I had to call in some help from a theologist friend because the canon is quite a labyrinth. She helped me find this passage out of the Baltimore canon: "6. Q. Why did God make you? A. God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next." According to canon, our relationship with God is what orients our lives. In fact, this is what she offered for summary: "Basically: our lives are oriented to be in relationship with God, to love and be loved by God (God loves us unconditionally), to do good by doing His will in this life, and by our doing His will in this life we enjoy the fullness and perfection of that relationship with Him in heaven."
Sounds nice and simple in theology, doesn't it? The aspect of Catholicism that does the fleshing out of this is cultural.
Essentially, for Catholics there's a sort of spiritual dynamism to our lives. The commandments, teachings and the exhortation to apply and develop our talents to better the world are markers we always need to be striving for; and that pushes us forward. That's what prayer and reflection can be for, to help us open our hearts and understand what we still struggle with. Then we need to take steps to change that.
Of course, even with God's help there are challenges in application. One issue that has become a major point of discussion as our scientific exploration of the brain and body continues is mental illness. Anxiety, depression and many more conditions are legitimate and to be taken seriously in medicine, science and society; because among other things they are crushing barriers to our spiritual development. Suicide, cutting, eating disorders and other terrible things are not sins because of that, it's a call to other people to be Christians and support them when it comes to getting help and treatment.
Thank you for explaining about the ball of clay. That helps me understand. 
Sorry to make you call in an adviser!
But it's a very pleasant answer they found. "God made me to know him, love him, and serve him in this world, and to be happy with him forever in the next."
I agree about mental illness. I don't think a person should be blamed for such things. We mormons talk a lot about agency, our ability to choose between right and wrong. Mental illness impairs agency. Particularly addiction. In serious cases of addiction a person may have literally no ability to choose.
Of the 'curable' varieties,(depression, addictions, eating disorders) the way I've seen people escape is something like this:
1. They are mentally ill.
2. Eventually God gives them an 'out' a brief moment of clarity and soberness.
3. They find the strength to make use of the opportunity.
4. Their state improves somewhat.
5. Eventually God give them a second 'out'...
And it continues until they are normal. It's not a fast process. Each 'out' may be months from the last. But gradual growth has always been the way God works with us.
Sorry to give you a treatise on mental illness. It just reminds me of a loved one with such problems.
Sorry to make you call in an adviser!
But it's a very pleasant answer they found. "God made me to know him, love him, and serve him in this world, and to be happy with him forever in the next." I agree about mental illness. I don't think a person should be blamed for such things. We mormons talk a lot about agency, our ability to choose between right and wrong. Mental illness impairs agency. Particularly addiction. In serious cases of addiction a person may have literally no ability to choose.
Of the 'curable' varieties,(depression, addictions, eating disorders) the way I've seen people escape is something like this:
1. They are mentally ill.
2. Eventually God gives them an 'out' a brief moment of clarity and soberness.
3. They find the strength to make use of the opportunity.
4. Their state improves somewhat.
5. Eventually God give them a second 'out'...
And it continues until they are normal. It's not a fast process. Each 'out' may be months from the last. But gradual growth has always been the way God works with us.
Sorry to give you a treatise on mental illness. It just reminds me of a loved one with such problems.
Oh no, do you know how happy she is when her esoteric expertise is called on? It's her chance to geek out.
I don't think we have particular word for it, so I'll be stealing 'agency' for further discussions.
One of the imperatives of the 3 sacraments of initiation--Baptism, Eucharist and Confirmation--is the cultivation of a moral conscience. Catholics don't see an issue with the baptism of infants in part because the godparents are willing taking on the role of helping that child mature in their faith over time, moral conscience included. (Alas, most godparents only take it as an honorary role.) Eucharist is usually at age 7, and Confirmation at 13-15. The ancient thinking was that at 7 a child should be able to understand right and wrong, and in their early teens they could be mature members of the faith. Now that child psychology and developmental neuroscience studies indicate that the decision centers are some of the last parts of the brain to mature into adulthood, there's a pretty vigorous debate over questions of moral conscience, sin and faith as a moral support structure. But it's falling along generational lines, like everything between Millennials and Baby Boomers.
The ones I've been the unfortunate witness to was severe depression and suicide, and that was heartbreaking.
I don't think we have particular word for it, so I'll be stealing 'agency' for further discussions.
One of the imperatives of the 3 sacraments of initiation--Baptism, Eucharist and Confirmation--is the cultivation of a moral conscience. Catholics don't see an issue with the baptism of infants in part because the godparents are willing taking on the role of helping that child mature in their faith over time, moral conscience included. (Alas, most godparents only take it as an honorary role.) Eucharist is usually at age 7, and Confirmation at 13-15. The ancient thinking was that at 7 a child should be able to understand right and wrong, and in their early teens they could be mature members of the faith. Now that child psychology and developmental neuroscience studies indicate that the decision centers are some of the last parts of the brain to mature into adulthood, there's a pretty vigorous debate over questions of moral conscience, sin and faith as a moral support structure. But it's falling along generational lines, like everything between Millennials and Baby Boomers.
The ones I've been the unfortunate witness to was severe depression and suicide, and that was heartbreaking.