Mormons baptizing our Pope posthumously


#1

I’m actually Ex-mo’s Catholic wife…Just a little too lazy to get my own ID.:o

I’m just wondering what the general feeling here and there is regarding the Mormon’s practice of Baptism of the Dead of our Catholic Popes and other deceased? Everyone seems to acknowledge that the Mormons intend to “do his Templework”. I guess its just a matter of time.

This is on the heels of the outrage of our Jewish counterparts in regards to the “baptisms” of their deceased, including Holocaust victims.
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=1&u=/ap/baptizing_the_dead

I guess I’m just surprised that the Catholics aren’t more publicly proactive about this subject, especially over someone as important as the Pope! The Mormons have “baptized by proxy” several key Catholic figures including many of our popes, Joan of Arc, and other historical figures (it’s beginning to sound like Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure:whacky: )

So how about it? Why don’t WE make the Mormons PUBLICLY answer to this UNWANTED practice just as the Jews are? This would definetly rock their world to have 1.1 BILLION in opposition to their plans to baptize our pope! Or … is this just a minor and harmless nuisance to ignore? Isn’t silence considered implied consent?


#2

We should be outraged about this. Some might think it’s minor, but how would you feel if you’re “baptized” posthumously by some Mormon?


#3

I’ve asked my wife about where the names come from for ‘baptizing of the dead’. The answer I got was that members can only submit family member names. I took this with a grain of salt. It was also explained to me that the individual had the right to accept or deny the baptism. This placated me for now since they believe everyone has free will. I know the Jews asked them not to baptize anyone from the holocausts of WWII, and the LDS church is honoring that request. Maybe we should make the same requests for our leaders of our church.


#4

Ex-Mo’s wife again…

I know I’m personally very offended by the arrogance of this act. I also realize my in-laws plan to do my, ex-mo’s, and our childrens templework. They’ve already said so. They also claim our children are “sealed” to them. Of course, without either of our permission…

We’d love to prevent any of this foolishness, but since it is all done in secret–it is IMPOSSIBLE. The only way to even draw attention to it is to call the Mormons out publicly as the Jews have done.

And no, Blueadept, the Mormons are NOT honoring that request from the Jews. They’ve been disobeying it for the last 10 years and the Jews have proof (as stated in the article I provided a link for).

Technically, they are only supposed submit names of relatives. However, if you do enough geneology-- we are all family, aren’t we?
:wink:

So who in the Catholic hierarchy do we need to “bombard” with inquiries about this unwelcome practice? I would suspect our opposition to this in regards to the Pope’s recent passing would make this very relevant for the Catholic leadership. Although the Mormons are very insignificant compared to the Catholic Church in numbers (12 million to 1.1 Billion worldwide).


#5

I am not Catholic and I find this offensive and outrageous.


#6

I’m a Catholic living in Utah - trust me I feel like an island in an ocean. I have done alot or reading on the LDS faith. Although quite interesting it is pretty much like a fairy tale. I have also read the news reports about the Jewish Holocaust victims being baptized by the Mormons and I think and believe it is a futile practice. Baptism affects the spirit, right? If that is the case, then the spirit has already departed the body and the baptism is now a moot point.

I recently read a commentary in the Salt Lake City tribune in which Catholocism and Mormonism are compared in regards to The Holy Father’s passing. It was quite interesting and I was shocked to see the level of respect and honor the commentator (admitted Mormon) gave to the Pope. It was nice to see until the very final sentence, which implied that The Holy Father will choose to become LDS now that he has passed.

Now - THAT was offensive.


#7

This is the first I have heard of it. Seems as though only historical situations or famous people get the honor. I think pregidous would be the word for this. What about me someday? Seriously though, I would be curious to know their reasons for this. Biblical or historical back up? I doubt this would be supported by any group out there.


#8

[font=Arial]I disagree thouroughly with Morman theology. But unlike many of you, I don’t find this offensive because I assume they are motivated by their faith and love to do something beneficial for our Pope’s soul. [/font]

Now I know there is a HUGE difference between Catholicm and Mormonism, and I am **not **defending Morman practices. But I am defending my own Catholic practices that I know would offend my Protestant in laws. I have Masses said and pray the rosary for them including his grandmother who passed away recently. I know they would be horrified to know I do this, so I don’t tell them. I just trust God will hear my prayers and take care of things.

I hope God will also hear Mormons’ prayer for how they are intended. I know they don’t have the fullness of truth, but I do hope they have hearts motivated by love. And I hope God will reward their efforts to help our Pope by sharing the truth of Catholicm that the Pope witnessed!


#9

Okay, they are obviously not going to get his body, so, how are they going to do this?

AND, they also baptised Adolph Hitler…I don’t want them to think of PJPII in the same way they think of Hitler.

And, yes, I am offended. :mad:


#10

[quote=gardenswithkids][font=Arial]I disagree thouroughly with Morman theology. But unlike many of you, I don’t find this offensive because I assume they are motivated by their faith and love to do something beneficial for our Pope’s soul.
[/quote]

[/font]
[font=Arial][/font]
Well, there’s a difference: when we pray for somoene, we trust that God would enlighten that person’s soul. It’s also voluntary: we let God work in His own time, and we don’t force that person to believe what we believe in. Mormon baptism of the dead seems to be “forcing” someone, as it is, to become Mormon. It has no consent from the deceased’s relatives nor from the deceased himself (well, there’s no way to do that anyhow).


#11

They aren’t baptizing these people, they’re baptizing a proxy in behalf of these people. Theyr’e trying to do the deceased some good.

Lighten up. What they’re doing doesn’t work, does it? So they’re just going through the motions and hurting nobody. Would you be offended if a Muslim prayed to Allah for you? Should I be offended if some Catholic prays to a saint for me, just because I don’t believe in it?

(I know, I know, some of you say you don’t pray to the saints. I’m referring now to those of you who have said on these boards that you do pray to the saints.)

And claiming that the pope now agrees with the LDS is nothing more or less than saying that the LDS is correct. They’ve always said that. They believe that. That’s why they’re LDS!


#12

I think why people are offended is the implication that this act brings, namely that unless you’re LDS, you won’t get to heaven. Which should rightly be seen as offensive, especially for us Catholics. That’s really what makes it offensive, the implied message the act brings.


#13

Help me out here, what are these guys doing? They are supposedly “Baptizing” someone who is not even there? Its one thing if they physically forced Jews or Catholics in there and did that its another thing if they are just “going through the motions”.
Why are the Jews mad about this? If anything they would feel sorry for those poor confused individuals. And really what are you trying to stop? Its no different than witchcraft and satanic spells cast in someones garage for “souls”.


#14

Mormons believe that even after someone dies, they can or will be given another chance to become Mormon.

Since they believe (like almost every group does) that their brand of faith or Christianity is the correct one, they think by baptizing folks after death even in abstentia, they are saing the soul of these folks from damnation.

I kind of think it is an amusing and somewhat bizzare ritual. But when you think about it they are also being very charitable…, also very pompous and self rightgeous, but somewhat charitable too.

It is rather annoying to be lumped in with Hitler, but he wasn’t mormon either.

wc


#15

Ex-mo,

You really are a piece of work. I understand that you likely have an axe to grind with your former religion–most people who leave one religion for another do. (At least, that’s why Karl Keating says you should take ex-Catholic exposés of the RCC with a grain of salt.) But this is pathetic. Now you are hanging around on a bulletin board drumming up hatred over nothing.

For the confused, here is the inside scoop on Mormon baptisms for the dead.

Mormons believe that one must be baptized via the proper authority to reach Heaven. That authority resides in the Church. However, not everyone gets to hear about the Gospel while on earth, so what happens to them? Furthermore, even some people who do hear about it probably hear about it in such a way that you couldn’t really call it a “fair hearing.” (For example, what if all someone knew about Catholicism they learned from Lorraine Boettner, who wrote a viscious anti-Catholic book?) Between death and the Resurrection, the spirits of the dead reside in a place Mormons call “the Spirit World.” Those who died without the proper chance to accept the gospel can be evangelized there. (Mormons interpret 1 Peter 3:18-4:6 as a reference to the evangelization of the dead.) How do these people receive baptism? Mormons believe someone on earth must do the sacrament for the deceased person. A reference to such a practice among the ancient Corinthian Christians can be found in 1 Corinthians 15:29-30. When such a proxy baptism is performed, it is believed that the deceased can either accept or reject it.

Boy, that’s offensive, isn’t it? In case there are still members of ex-mo’s lynch mob who find themselves agreeing with my sarcastic statement, let me do a little comparison.

COMPARISON WITH CATHOLICISM:

  1. Catholics believe that one must receive baptism through the Church to be saved. They believe that baptisms from some other Christian denominations are valid, but all saving grace must flow through the Roman Catholic Church (whether the recipients know it or not.) Others can be saved without baptism if they were in a state of “invincible ignorance,” but they must have some sort of “baptism of desire.” The bottom line is that all authority for saving ordinances comes through the Catholic Church. You just don’t do anything in particular to help the process, except praying for the dead. Mormons don’t have any concept of “baptism of desire,” so we actually perform a physical rite.

  2. Flip open your Catholic Bibles to 2 Maccabees 12:38-45. These verses tell the story of how Judas Maccabeus led an army in battle, and a number of the men were killed. It was discovered that every one of them had idolatrous amulets (forbidden by the Law of Moses) hidden under their tunics. Judas had everyone pray for the dead, and then sent a sin offering on their behalf to Jerusalem. Imagine! Performing a saving ordinance on behalf of the dead! How obnoxious! How arrogant! What if they really believed in their idolatrous gods, and didn’t WANT to be good Jews? But the text says this was “a fit and proper act in which he took due account of the resurrection. For if he had not been expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been foolish and superfluous to pray for the dead. But since he had in view the wonderful reward reserved for those who die a godly death, his purpose was a holy and pious one. And this is why he offered an atoning sacrifice to free the dead from their sin.” (verses 43-45)

Honestly, is any of this worth getting worked up over? If you don’t believe Mormon baptism is effective, then how could this possibly make any difference to you, whatsoever? Are you going around looking for things to get offended about? Should I be offended if my Catholic relatives pray to Mary about me? Some of them sent us a Christmas card saying that they had paid to have a candle lit for us in some monastery, or something. Frankly, I thought it was nice of them, and I appreciated the thought.

BDawg


#16

Oh, and another thing. The LDS Church does not control who has a baptism done for them. If some yokel wants to get baptized for Adolf Hitler, he can probably do it, because all he has to do is clear the name through some computer program. (Although, it would be funny to see the looks on the faces of the officiators overseeing the rite. Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.) This is analogous to some Catholic lighting a candle and praying for Hitler, basically. Really, I doubt whether any of that would do Hitler any good, but on the other hand, I’m not God, and maybe old Adolf will get time off from hell for being a nut job.

On the bright side, I haven’t been participating on this board very long, but I am usually encouraged by presence of a few fair-minded people around here. Nearly every time someone starts a thread about how awful the Mormons are, some Catholic shows up and tries to promote a little more tolerance and understanding. I, for one, appreciate it.

BDawg


#17

[quote=BDawg]Ex-mo,

You really are a piece of work. I understand that you likely have an axe to grind with your former religion–most people who leave one religion for another do. (At least, that’s why Karl Keating says you should take ex-Catholic exposés of the RCC with a grain of salt.) But this is pathetic. Now you are hanging around on a bulletin board drumming up hatred over nothing.

Boy, that’s offensive, isn’t it? In case there are still members of ex-mo’s lynch mob who find themselves agreeing with my sarcastic statement, let me do a little comparison.

Honestly, is any of this worth getting worked up over? If you don’t believe Mormon baptism is effective, then how could this possibly make any difference to you, whatsoever? Are you going around looking for things to get offended about? Should I be offended if my Catholic relatives pray to Mary about me? Some of them sent us a Christmas card saying that they had paid to have a candle lit for us in some monastery, or something. Frankly, I thought it was nice of them, and I appreciated the thought.

BDawg
[/quote]

BDawg,

Please, just calm down.

If you would have carefully read the post, you would have seen it was NOT posted by Ex-Mormon, but by ME, his wife, logged into my husband’s ID.

I’m actually Ex-mo’s Catholic wife…Just a little too lazy to get my own ID.:o

I’m sure he has his own things to say regarding this issue. But now that I have my own ID–there shouldn’t be anymore confusion about who said what.

With that being said, it should be clear that what I said is from a born and raised Catholic’s point of view–not an Ex-Mormon’s. This might make a difference in how you view this original post.

Of course I realize the Mormon’s are only doing what they believe is right. It is of course, charitable. It never hurts to have extra prayers as we all know that God is honored by any prayer that is sincere.

I am glad to see I brought some light to some Catholics that were unaware of this practice. It concerns us, so why shouldn’t we discuss it?


#18

[quote=BDawg]Ex-mo,

You really are a piece of work. I understand that you likely have an axe to grind with your former religion–most people who leave one religion for another do. (At least, that’s why Karl Keating says you should take ex-Catholic exposés of the RCC with a grain of salt.) But this is pathetic. Now you are hanging around on a bulletin board drumming up hatred over nothing.

Boy, that’s offensive, isn’t it? In case there are still members of ex-mo’s lynch mob who find themselves agreeing with my sarcastic statement, let me do a little comparison.

BDawg
[/quote]

BDawg,

As my Mormon Bishop Father would say “Brother BDawg, that wasn’t very Christ like of you” Next time read the entire post, and mabye you wouldn’t have to resort to calling people a “piece of work” or accusing them of hanging around to drum up hatred. If you consider that a Cradle Catholic, like my wife, can’t believe that the LDS church would have the gull to baptize the Pope, the Vicar of Christ, then mabye you would realize that this is not hatred but concern about an obscure religous practice. As for the “lynch mob” comment I find it troubeling that you have such a pursacution complex, It’s not as if you are being ran out of Missouri for your beliefs, so try not to be so thin skinned.

Originally Posted by BDawg
Honestly, is any of this worth getting worked up over? If you don’t believe Mormon baptism is effective, then how could this possibly make any difference to you, whatsoever? Are you going around looking for things to get offended about?

No, but your tone implies that you are offended. Honestly, I could care less if Mormons wan’t to baptize anyone after they are dead. It’s not a part of my belief system and I know there is no true priesthood authority when it is done so why should it bother anyone.

more…


#19

…continued

Originally Posted by BDawg

COMPARISON WITH CATHOLICISM:

  1. Catholics believe that one must receive baptism through the Church to be saved. They believe that baptisms from some other Christian denominations are valid, but all saving grace must flow through the Roman Catholic Church (whether the recipients know it or not.) Others can be saved without baptism if they were in a state of “invincible ignorance,” but they must have some sort of “baptism of desire.” The bottom line is that all authority for saving ordinances comes through the Catholic Church.

All saving ordinances come through Christ. A sacrament is defined as; An outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace.

From the Catechism 1257 …The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” ***God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments. ***

Originally Posted by BDawg
You just don’t do anything in particular to help the process, except praying for the dead. Mormons don’t have any concept of “baptism of desire,” so we actually perform a physical rite.

We don’t have anthing to do but pray for their souls. God is not bound by his sacraments so he is the one who evaluates who receives his salvation, not man. That is why Catholics and all Christians take issue with the Mormon practice of Baptism for the Dead. What gives the LDS the right to do what only God can do for these souls, that is why people are up in arms. Mormons believe that they have the fullness of the Gospel and that they have restored Gods Church. 1 Peter 3:18-4:6 describes how Christ preached to the to those in the spirit prison for their salvation. Once again he is not bound by his sacraments, we are, the living not the dead. In 1 Corinthians 15:29-30. Paul is not condoning the practice by these ancient christians he’s asking to what purpose is this done if dead are not raised at all. If Christ died for our sins and he is the judge then why would dead men need to be baptized when they are receiving his preaching in the Spirit Prison? I don’t see how these two scriptures can give Mormons the “fullness of the Gospel” with relation to a “restored Church” and baptism for the dead.

Originally Posted by BDawg
2. Flip open your Catholic Bibles to 2 Maccabees 12:38-45. These verses tell the story of how Judas Maccabeus led an army in battle, and a number of the men were killed. It was discovered that every one of them had idolatrous amulets (forbidden by the Law of Moses) hidden under their tunics. Judas had everyone pray for the dead, and then sent a sin offering on their behalf to Jerusalem. Imagine! Performing a saving ordinance on behalf of the dead! How obnoxious! How arrogant! What if they really believed in their idolatrous gods, and didn’t WANT to be good Jews? But the text says this was “a fit and proper act in which he took due account of the resurrection. For if he had not been expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been foolish and superfluous to pray for the dead. But since he had in view the wonderful reward reserved for those who die a godly death, his purpose was a holy and pious one. And this is why he offered an atoning sacrifice to free the dead from their sin.” (verses 43-45)

Judas prayed for these souls, he did not get baptized for them. Let me beat a dead horse “We don’t have anthing to do but pray for their souls. God is not bound by his sacraments so he is the one who evaluates who receives his salvation, not man.”

If you wan’t to have an honest discussion about our religous differeces then I would appreciate it if you could keep a civil tone in your posts. If you feel you need to fly off the handle then I don’t think an honest debate about our religous differences is worth my time. I don’t have a problem with you or anyone else saying that I took a quote out of context and trying to correct it, but personally attacking someone because they have a different point of view is beneath all of us on this forum.

God bless,

ex-mo


#20

Honestly,
The idea of having LDS baptize my wife and kids by proxy doesn’t concern me in the least. To me it’s an empty sacrament, why worry about it? I just don’t understand what all the furor is about. I haven’t gone to the trouble to have my name removed from the LDS Church membership rolls either for the same reason (although the local ward knows I’m a Catholic now so they may have done it for me, I don’t know).

There is only one true church, everything else is a “non-church” in my eyes, an empty, impotent, attempt at being the real Church. So, I don’t care if my name’s on that roll anymore than I care if my son includes my name in his imaginary Super Mario Party 6 “in the game” club. Neither is real, neither MEANS anything. Same for “ordinances” for the dead. Baptize away LDS! If it makes you feel good, why then do it. My 5 year old son “knighted” me last week. I know I’m not a real knight just because he thinks I am. And, JPII knows that the proxy LDS baptism he’ll receive has absolutely no meaning despite the fact LDS think it does. It doesn’t somehow put him at odds with God. I’m sure it’s not even on his radar screen and frankly, it shouldn’t be on ours either.

That said, Bdawg should at least be able to understand how someone else could feel violated in some way over having an “ordinance” done (efficacious or not) in their name without consent. Bdawg, you ARE in a Catholic forum, please remember that. We’re not over in an LDS forum disparaging your faith. Did you really expect to find us ex-LDS brimming with pro-LDS thoughts and feelings? Why are you here anyway? Simply to argue and berate? A little less hostility is in order.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.