What is interesting to me is that to the extent that you can say that worthiness at least does play some role in our Christian religion as well (see, e.g., 1 Corinthians 11:29; at least in the NKJV, which is the English translation favored in my Church, St. Paul speaks of worthiness), the Mormon religion takes it to an extreme that is only ever seen in Christianity in times of extreme stress and fragmentation, as with the rise of the Arians and their creation of a parallel parasitic church, or the Chalcedonian schism which actually created two separate bodies.
By this I mean that you can infer from some of the earliest sources that we have, such as St. Ignatius of Antioch's
letter to the Smyrneans (c. 107 AD), that it was the early church's practice to still allow those regarded as heretics at least into the church gathering, whereby the heretics would show themselves by their practice:
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.
"They abstain from the Eucharist" -- hence, they must've
actually been there, as it does not make sense to say that one is abstaining but in an environment where others are not. For example, I wouldn't say I "abstain" from the Roman Catholic Eucharist, because that implies I'm in a place where I could otherwise receive it, if I chose to and it was offered (in other words, it's not like it's
long-distance abstaining or receiving). I could say I
would abstain, were it offered, but that's conditional in a way that St. Ignatius' statement is not.
So isn't it a little odd, my friends, that the Mormons treat their own -- not even heretics (if there is such a thing, relative to Mormonism's standards), but members who are just not 'worthy' enough -- worse than Christians who were openly declaring their heresy? We did not deny such
entrance into the worshiping community (as in, the ability to be physically present there), only warning them that by their disputing the clear and orthodox faith they incurred death (by walking away from the faith; it's a warning, not a command).
It's a really strange, and I think
telling, difference. It's as though they treat even the presence inside their building in a manner similar to a traditional church which practices closed communion, yet at the same time they have their 'sacrament' outside of the temple in their meeting halls instead, which anyone can go into and even partake of their sacrament with them while they're there. This is very strange, from a traditional Christian perspective. They took the holy thing and gave it to everyone, but the 'liturgy' of theirs? No way. You can't see that. We can't talk about that. That's
too sacred.
Ya got it backwards, JS! Exactly backwards! You shut everyone but the 'worthy' out of your liturgy, but then took your sacrament and put
that outside of your liturgy, as well! How weird.