(From a CNS story)
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- In an effort to block posthumous rebaptisms by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Catholic dioceses throughout the world have been directed by the Vatican not to give information in parish registers to the Mormons' Genealogical Society of Utah.
An April 5 letter from the Vatican Congregation for Clergy, obtained by Catholic News Service in late April, asks episcopal conferences to direct all bishops to keep the Latter-day Saints from microfilming and digitizing information contained in those registers.
The order came in light of "grave reservations" expressed in a Jan. 29 letter from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the clergy congregation's letter said.
(Read the rest of the story here).
Finally, something is being done about this. For years, Mormons have been mining Church records for names for posthumous baptism. (This is the principle purpose of the titanic genealogical efforts of the Mormon church.) While, of course, these proxy baptisms have no effect, we certainly shouldn't be aiding them in any way.
(Now, if only something would be done about selling vestments and other sacred items.)
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
I had no idea these folks were engaging in "posthumous rebaptisms." That's the strangest thing I've ever heard in my life.
As strange as posthumous marriages.
Fr. Erik Richtsteig said...
Now, if only something would be done about selling vestments and other sacred items.
Yeah, I work in Berkeley. The last thing we need is panhandlers with collection baskets ;-)
It's unfortunate that information will no longer be available. Arguably one of the best things the mormons have done, has been to aid people who are searching for their roots. If as you say, these baptisms have no effect, it seems that the greater good is served by open information. Not that I give a dingo's kidney.
I have the opposite view.
As a genealogist, I L-O-V-E the LDS and its "doing my work for me" thing.
I don't care if they baptize my grandpa or declare my husband the King of Jupiter or make my cat the majority stockholder of Widget, Inc.
(All of these things are equally meaningful.)
I thank them for their work.
Though some of their info is flawed, it's been helpful nonetheless.
Keep on keeping on, corpse baptizers!
Sheesh...it's just kinda creepy.
Joseph Smith and the golden tablets. Oy.
The whole LDS thing just leave me shaking my head.
Having been a participant in proxy baptism at the age of 14, my recollection of the event is this: you stand in a large baptismal font supported by ceramic oxen (the pioneer symbolism at work here); a monitor screen is at the side of the font while the elder reads off the prayer at hyper speed pausing to pronounce (intelligibly) the name of the deceased individual for whom you are being baptized. This goes on for about 10 to 15 baptisms which, I assume is about the tolerance level for being dunked. And then another adolescent is sent in.
Another noteworthy tidbit: adolescents are routinely checked out of school to peform this temple work.
Despite my childhood, I found the church through my vocation (and some Benedictine nuns praying for me!).
Ain't no descendent o' mine is gonna spring me from Catholic Heaven, where I've got my morning coffee and Happy Hour just before Bingo . . .
"grave reservations" made me giggle.
LDG--
LOL! Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed the pun.
Mormons lead many people astray with false prophets, teachings and doctrines--they lead people away from our true Lord with their lies.
We should not help them perpetuate their false doctrines by assisting them by taking away our privacy. Do they truly believe that they can baptize every human that has ever lived?
We only die once, and when we do, we "cross the line." We will at that moment be judged--no second chances.
Our salvation depends on God's Grace--and our willingness to participate in His Grace. Do they really think our salvation depends on THEM--the teens who get out of school to get dunked--not one single strand of clothing remaining un-dunked--or it will invalidate God's Grace--how absurd!
Mike said, "these baptisms have no effect" He is correct--it is a futile practice, but by doing so, they make a haughty and disrespectful statement--that our "free will" is invalid, and they will be the means for our salvation--that is just plain sick and wrong!
1 Timothy 1-4:
"I repeat the request I made of you when I was on my way to Macedonia, that you stay in Ephesus to instruct certain people not to teach false doctrines or to concern themselves with myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the plan of God that is to be received by faith."
Titus 3:9
Avoid foolish arguments, genealogies, rivalries, and quarrels about the law, for they are useless and futile.
Tara said...Mike said, "these baptisms have no effect"
Actually Fr. Erik Richtsteig said that. I of course don't disagree because I don't think baptisms ever have any effect.
Tara said...
it is a futile practice...
...lead many people astray with false prophets, teachings and doctrines...
...We should not help them perpetuate their false doctrines by assisting them...
hmmm. I'd say I agree.
I'm inclined to say I agree with Fr. Erik and Tara on this, while I do appreciate the genealogical side benefits of the Mormons' rebaptisms.
It just seems to me to be disrespectful and rude to proxy-baptize someone. I say "Thanks but no thanks" to the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses who proselytize me; proxy baptizing someone, whether dead or alive, essentially removes their ability to refuse. I don't like that, irrespective of whether the proxy baptism actually means anything from a spiritual standpoint.
If you see a man eating his own excrement you don' t hand a knife and fork. You go go "hey, dude, you're crazy." And you get him some help. By allowing Mormons access to church records we are just indulging their sad religious delusion. I'm an amateur geneaologist but I'd rather have a harder time of it than go along with nonsense.
I agree Dymphna. We shouldn't indulge, (in your words) "sad religious delusion".
Of course we need a way to determine which beliefs are true, and which ones are "sad" and "deluded". That is key.
Father Erik - I've wanted to ask you to say thank you to the powers that be that emphasized this "privacy" of the baptismal records.
I agree with kasia. I do not wish to ever be on a Mormon roster. I have made that choice in life, and do not ever want someone to remove that choice after my death. I would not want my descendants to think that I agreed with Mormon theologies.
For Mike -
Of course we need a way to determine which beliefs are true, and which ones are "sad" and "deluded". That is key.
At least the Catholic faith has been in existence since the time of Jesus. The Mormons have been around for less than 200 years and had their founder destroy all evidence of the beginnings of the faith. No history (plates went back to the mountain never to be seen again)...no geography that matches his stories anywhere in the world...nothing is verifiable. At least the Catholics left items in tact for future scholars to study. Even the atheists that I know recognize Jesus as a historical figure. As such, history should be important and shouldn't be destroyed.
Lisa
Lisa said...
At least the Catholic faith has been in existence since the time of Jesus. The Mormons have been around for less than 200 years...
Sure, but age can't be the criteria to determine truth. There are many faiths that existed long before Catholicism or Christianity. Take the Zoroastrian faith just to name one. Zoroaster is said to be historical from about 1000BCE, and personally composed the "Gathas" within the "Avesta"(the Zoroastrian sacred texts). You don't suppose the Zoroastrian religion is more correct than Christianity just because it's older.
Even the atheists that I know recognize Jesus as a historical figure.
History is a funny thing. Facts and stories inevitably get con-fused together, creating our not-so-perfect perception of history.
There were certainly many people at the time, with the name "Jesus" (Actually Yesua, or similar, no one really had the westernized name "Jesus"). Additionally, there were many people who were not named Jesus, yet had followers who referred to them as the Savior or Christ. Scriptures still exist showing this, even though early church fathers attempted to destroy them. If you go back and look at the documents, you find that many dismissed Christianity as just a retelling of bits and peices of previously known stories (virgin births, killing of the innocents, ascension, etc.)
Although Homer wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey, there is some evidence that he may not have existed as a historical person, but rather these stories are a compilation from Bards though history, distilled into the idea that they came from one man. There is good evidence to suggest that we have a similar situation with "Jesus the Christ".
Post a Comment