Reader comments
Catholics told not to give LDS parish data
777 comments | Read story
Family On Earth | 4:40 p.m. May 5, 2008
I believe life as we know it as we experience it with our families should be our
focus, not a belief in an after life. What better way to honor a family
member than to abide by the wishes of that dead family member as the family knew
him on earth. What better way to honor the immediate family member than to
honor their wishes?
Catholic Homer | 4:41 p.m. May 5, 2008
The Mormon Church has around fourteen million members, whereas the Catholic
Church has over one billion. They can't even be mentioned in the same
universe. The Catholic Church is also two thousand years old.
Comments continue below
Thomas | 4:46 p.m. May 5, 2008
Mark -- I offer my comment on Oliver Cromwell in the same spirit as the Vatican
offered its thumb to the eye of the LDS Church on the baptism issue. I say the
descendants of the Inquisitors have something of a log in their own eye getting
the vapors over references to Cromwell.
As much as I admire the present Catholic Church as the custodian of a magnificent intellectual and spiritual tradition, and as virtually the last keeper of the flickering Christian flame in Europe, I am heartily glad that the English-speaking world gave Rome the heave-ho during the Reformation. As nasty as both sides in the Reformation got (and Cromwell's acts at Drogheda, though exaggerated by Catholic propagandists, would never be countenanced today), I am convinced that the right side won in England, and that Anglo-American civilization would have been much the worse for having continued as a Catholic society.
As much as I admire the present Catholic Church as the custodian of a magnificent intellectual and spiritual tradition, and as virtually the last keeper of the flickering Christian flame in Europe, I am heartily glad that the English-speaking world gave Rome the heave-ho during the Reformation. As nasty as both sides in the Reformation got (and Cromwell's acts at Drogheda, though exaggerated by Catholic propagandists, would never be countenanced today), I am convinced that the right side won in England, and that Anglo-American civilization would have been much the worse for having continued as a Catholic society.
Thomas | 4:55 p.m. May 5, 2008
"To Alex" --
"The LDS Trinity and the Christian Trinity are not the same. Look it up."
I *have* looked it up, and researched the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds backwards and forwards. My considered conclusion is that both sides are exaggerating the differences: the Mormons, to gin up a need for a "restoration" of important doctrines on which traditional Christianity was in error, and traditional Christians, because they think Mormons are weird and just hate having secularists tar all religionists with the same kooky brush.
The bottoml line is that Mormons believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are separate persons, who are nevertheless one God in some mystical sense. Hairsplitting aside, that's pretty much the traditional Christian position, too. Such a lot of fighting over stuff nobody truly knows anything about.
Don't get me started on Elder Holland's infamous mistranslation of the word "immensus" in the Athanasian Creed. Short version: It doesn't mean "incomprehensible" in the modern sense of "impossible to be understood."
"The LDS Trinity and the Christian Trinity are not the same. Look it up."
I *have* looked it up, and researched the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds backwards and forwards. My considered conclusion is that both sides are exaggerating the differences: the Mormons, to gin up a need for a "restoration" of important doctrines on which traditional Christianity was in error, and traditional Christians, because they think Mormons are weird and just hate having secularists tar all religionists with the same kooky brush.
The bottoml line is that Mormons believe the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are separate persons, who are nevertheless one God in some mystical sense. Hairsplitting aside, that's pretty much the traditional Christian position, too. Such a lot of fighting over stuff nobody truly knows anything about.
Don't get me started on Elder Holland's infamous mistranslation of the word "immensus" in the Athanasian Creed. Short version: It doesn't mean "incomprehensible" in the modern sense of "impossible to be understood."
ME | 4:56 p.m. May 5, 2008
Dear "It wouldn't be offensive":
It wouldn't be offensive to YOU if someone were to baptize you into some other church. Why draw on your morality solely on the basis of reference to the way you experience the world and honor the dead and their immediate families by using the dead person's name in a religious ceremony of the dead?
It strikes me as rude to insist on using the name of anyone for their religious purposes.
It wouldn't be offensive to YOU if someone were to baptize you into some other church. Why draw on your morality solely on the basis of reference to the way you experience the world and honor the dead and their immediate families by using the dead person's name in a religious ceremony of the dead?
It strikes me as rude to insist on using the name of anyone for their religious purposes.
Religion | 5:08 p.m. May 5, 2008
When reading the comments in this thread, I find that religion does nothing to
improve the moral good will of humans. Instead of focusing on the sky,
let's bring ourselves back to earth and rid ourselves of religious dogma.
Does Thomas know anything about the history of anti-Catholic sentiment among Protestants in England and the cruelty involved? Wow! One moment you're praising the Catholic church, and next moment slamming it.
I'm convinced that religious is the source of much of what's wrong the world. If the Catholic Church had reigned over England, England would probably have been just as cruel as they were as Protestants.
Does Thomas know anything about the history of anti-Catholic sentiment among Protestants in England and the cruelty involved? Wow! One moment you're praising the Catholic church, and next moment slamming it.
I'm convinced that religious is the source of much of what's wrong the world. If the Catholic Church had reigned over England, England would probably have been just as cruel as they were as Protestants.
Gary | 5:08 p.m. May 5, 2008
Bruce R. McKonkie said the Catholic Church is the "Great and Abominable
Church of the Devil." Why should the greatest and oldest Christian
denomination on the planet cut a small startup sect any slack. Also, the LDS
Church sends out missionaries to steal away Catholic converts in third world
countries without providing anything with regard to social justice.
Sally | 5:27 p.m. May 5, 2008
Jeepers, Is there a religious freedom problem on here or what? I don't
think the dead care one way or another if someone wants to do work for
them...BIG DEAL! Who cares? I'd like to know how its going to
"personally" harm any of you?
To Decider of Denominator | 5:30 p.m. May 5, 2008
, Orion and others.
What happens if people get to the other side and realize their chosen denomination�s wrong? The LDS church believes that God's work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. We believe that God so loved the world that he sent His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. Yet on this earth they believe in Him but they are kept from salvation due to a technicality-the ordinance of baptism. Then, if they are given the opportunity, no technicality can keep them from God's promises. God is all powerful, wise, all-loving, etc. and because of that, has given everyone the opportunity to be saved in one of three kingdoms-which have many mansions in each.
It doesn't matter that the catholics hold back their records because the Savior is soon coming for the second time and when he does, 1,000 years will be dedicated to this work and no hindering will happen. Those who reject (telestial beings) won't be on the earth and won't be saved for this 1,000 years and those who don't reject will be here physically to do the work.
What happens if people get to the other side and realize their chosen denomination�s wrong? The LDS church believes that God's work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. We believe that God so loved the world that he sent His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. Yet on this earth they believe in Him but they are kept from salvation due to a technicality-the ordinance of baptism. Then, if they are given the opportunity, no technicality can keep them from God's promises. God is all powerful, wise, all-loving, etc. and because of that, has given everyone the opportunity to be saved in one of three kingdoms-which have many mansions in each.
It doesn't matter that the catholics hold back their records because the Savior is soon coming for the second time and when he does, 1,000 years will be dedicated to this work and no hindering will happen. Those who reject (telestial beings) won't be on the earth and won't be saved for this 1,000 years and those who don't reject will be here physically to do the work.
just thiking... | 5:41 p.m. May 5, 2008
Some interesting numbers: Say you do 2 baptisms/minute, 18 hours/day, ~120
temples, 365 days/year. You'd do 94 million posthumous baptisms/year. Very
impressive. At that rate, you'd go through the entire available database (2
billion names according to lds.org newsroom) in about 20 years.
But it gets tricky. At that rate, it would take 343 years to baptize every one of the 32 billion humans estimated to have been born since 1,200 AD (prb.org). And then another 778 years to get the 74 billion or so souls born before that. On top of that, you'd have to dedicate about 80 temples just to keep up with the 60 million or so people who die each year.
I don't mean this to be discouraging. After all, if you have faith that this work will get done, then you won't be discouraged. I just think it could help the dialog if people inside the LDS Church could see how preposterous this practice looks to the rest of the world, and help you feel better that the names from the Catholic Church are really an insignificant drop in the population bucket.
But it gets tricky. At that rate, it would take 343 years to baptize every one of the 32 billion humans estimated to have been born since 1,200 AD (prb.org). And then another 778 years to get the 74 billion or so souls born before that. On top of that, you'd have to dedicate about 80 temples just to keep up with the 60 million or so people who die each year.
I don't mean this to be discouraging. After all, if you have faith that this work will get done, then you won't be discouraged. I just think it could help the dialog if people inside the LDS Church could see how preposterous this practice looks to the rest of the world, and help you feel better that the names from the Catholic Church are really an insignificant drop in the population bucket.
torquemada | 5:41 p.m. May 5, 2008
So, if during the millenium all of the temple "work" is going to get
done, why bother with it now?
Could it be to keep the tithing dollars rolling in??
Could it be to keep the tithing dollars rolling in??
Michael E. Bristow | 5:48 p.m. May 5, 2008
I'm rather suprised that Msgr. Fitzgerald would try to be so
"politic" with the Mormons. Right now the LDS Church is running so
far & fast away from questions of polygamy, that the last thing they need is
to take the Catholic Church about anything.
What's the Roman Catholic Church - a billion plus, and the LDS make a big deal about their 12 million, world-wide. And, half of that is overseas, so what left, 6 million in the US. That's not even half of Los Angeles County.
I would sincerely recommend to Bishop Webster not to be to cowardly in his relations with the Mormon Church. They are not on solid ground right now.
What's the Roman Catholic Church - a billion plus, and the LDS make a big deal about their 12 million, world-wide. And, half of that is overseas, so what left, 6 million in the US. That's not even half of Los Angeles County.
I would sincerely recommend to Bishop Webster not to be to cowardly in his relations with the Mormon Church. They are not on solid ground right now.
Hey, guess what!!! | 5:49 p.m. May 5, 2008
I'm just grateful to live in a time and a country where no one is shoving a
gun barrel, sword, or bow and arrow in my face and demanding that I accept a
certain religion as "true." Or burning me at the stake. Or torturing
me for not giving into their demands. Too bad my French Huguenot ancestors
didn't have the same situation. They had to escape to England and
eventually America.
I'm going to continue to perform proxy temple work for my ancestors, no matter what religion they were in this life, because I believe that Jesus Christ's gospel was founded on the truth that everyone has freedom of choice. It's my choice to do this work, and it's my ancestors' choice to say "Thanks, I was hoping you'd do that" or "No thanks, I'll stay my same Methodist/Presbyterian/Baptist self."
"The dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on."
I'm going to continue to perform proxy temple work for my ancestors, no matter what religion they were in this life, because I believe that Jesus Christ's gospel was founded on the truth that everyone has freedom of choice. It's my choice to do this work, and it's my ancestors' choice to say "Thanks, I was hoping you'd do that" or "No thanks, I'll stay my same Methodist/Presbyterian/Baptist self."
"The dogs may bark, but the caravan moves on."
To whom this pertains | 5:55 p.m. May 5, 2008
I don't think there'd be an outcry by anyone of the LDS faith if other
denominations or Satan's followers were taking names of LDS and doing their
version of baptisms because it wouldn't count. I think that if
Satan's followers were taking an interest in names at all it would be to
find out who the living saints are so they could "slayeth the saints of
God, yea, and tortureth them and bindeth them down, and yoketh them with a yoke
of iron, and bringeth them down into captivity." All followers of Satan
desire captivity and death of the righteous. It won't matter if they are
catholic, baptist, presbyterian, coJCoLDS, etc. If they are righteous, followers
of Satan want them to not have freedom, and want to seek their premature death.
As those who killed the Jews and other places. Baptisms for the dead (by proxy)
isn't a grave-robber type mentality.
Somebody wrote this and I quote it, I'm sure I don't quote it perfectly either. "He that is offended when no offense is intended is a fool" "He that is offended when offense is intended, is a greater fool"
The problem we have as Christians: we're not united!
Somebody wrote this and I quote it, I'm sure I don't quote it perfectly either. "He that is offended when no offense is intended is a fool" "He that is offended when offense is intended, is a greater fool"
The problem we have as Christians: we're not united!
Mark | 6:09 p.m. May 5, 2008
I completely agree with the churches protection of records of the church since
releasing those records would undermine the one true baptism, as a sacrament.
Jesus had to become man in order to forgive sin and comply with the sacrament of
baptism so baptism of the deceased by proxy has no Biblical premise no matter
who self proscribes to be a prophet and come up with a new revelation/doctrine
or covenant. Jesus came once and when he comes again "for real" we
will have judgement based upon our divine nature as man, with body and soul.
To whom this pertains, cont. | 6:19 p.m. May 5, 2008
Everyone who believes in Christ needs to unite. He that is divided shall fall.
There is only one way to do that! That is ask God what his will is. Is God a
liar? No! And he says, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God,
that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a
wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed". Yet, very, very few
people ever do this. Including those in the LDS faith. If all people were to
do this, all Christians would be united.
As far as Bruce R. McKonkie is concerned saying the Catholic Church as great and abominable church. 1 NE 13. That is his opinion. The church asked him to retract that and he did. What matters is the revelation that comes from the first presidency. NOT individual opinions. That's the same with MT. Meadow Massacre. The Council (the church) told them over and over and over again "NO". Those involved acted alone not waiting even for Brigham Youngs response to leave the wagon trains alone!
As far as Bruce R. McKonkie is concerned saying the Catholic Church as great and abominable church. 1 NE 13. That is his opinion. The church asked him to retract that and he did. What matters is the revelation that comes from the first presidency. NOT individual opinions. That's the same with MT. Meadow Massacre. The Council (the church) told them over and over and over again "NO". Those involved acted alone not waiting even for Brigham Youngs response to leave the wagon trains alone!
bj | 6:19 p.m. May 5, 2008
The LDS church is not copying these records specifically for baptisms.....they
are copying for the genealogy, and only if member of the Lds faith submit their
personal family members for baptism is it then done..........not as a parish, or
otherwise. they are doing this for the good of all including Catholics worldwide
wanting to trace their own roots, without submitting names for Baptism.
Curious | 6:25 p.m. May 5, 2008
What I want to know is if the dead at least get to play some baseball.
Suspicious | 6:26 p.m. May 5, 2008
Why, all of a sudden, at this particular point in time, did this particular pope
make this particular decision? The LDS Church has been microfilming parish
records for decades, spanning numerous popes. This is the same pope that
enraged the Jewish community by issuing the revised "Good Friday Prayer for
the Jews" which specifically prays for the conversion of the Jews to
Christianity. There is something not quite right with this man's thinking.
The Catholic church is in serious decline, not just in the USA, but across
Europe as well, even in Italy. I suspect this will not be the last of the
peculiar, controversial pronouncements from him in some misguided attempt to
save the faith.
Thomas | 6:31 p.m. May 5, 2008
Dear "Religion" -- Sorry to give you whiplash, "one moment
praising the Catholic church, and the next moment slamming it," be advised
I'm sort of an equal-opportunity offender in that respect. There is plenty
to admire and criticize in all religious traditions, including my own.
Catholicism's strengths lie in its continuity, its conservatism, and its use of both faith *and* reason in the pursuit of religious truth. (I believe the RCC is far superior to much of American Protestantism, with those churches' fideistic tendencies, in that respect.)
On the other hand, it is also true that the RCC is a powerful institution, which, in the past and occasionally continuing to the present, has tempted it to go beyond the proper stewardship of a kingdom that is not supposed to be of this world. I believe "Catholic social teaching" has often interfered with democracy and rational economics, and that cultures in which Catholic doctrines have too great an influence have tended to fall into economic stagnation and political illiberalism. Latin America is a classic case in point.
There's a lesson here for *any* hierarchical church that gets too involved in political and economic culture.
Catholicism's strengths lie in its continuity, its conservatism, and its use of both faith *and* reason in the pursuit of religious truth. (I believe the RCC is far superior to much of American Protestantism, with those churches' fideistic tendencies, in that respect.)
On the other hand, it is also true that the RCC is a powerful institution, which, in the past and occasionally continuing to the present, has tempted it to go beyond the proper stewardship of a kingdom that is not supposed to be of this world. I believe "Catholic social teaching" has often interfered with democracy and rational economics, and that cultures in which Catholic doctrines have too great an influence have tended to fall into economic stagnation and political illiberalism. Latin America is a classic case in point.
There's a lesson here for *any* hierarchical church that gets too involved in political and economic culture.
non-mormon here | 6:41 p.m. May 5, 2008
If you as a Mormon believe that you're going to eventially get
everyone's name, including some hunter and gatherer in... ancient
Mesopotamia, for example, why worry about some meager Catholic records if
you're going to have the ability to get the info get the name an Iraqi that
lived 12,000 years ago? Non-mormons are not getting this concept of your church.
Thomas | 6:42 p.m. May 5, 2008
"Religion," again: Keep in mind that Protestant England's
repression of Catholics occurred in the context of an age in which Englishmen
who fell into Catholic hands tended to get burned at the stake as heretics. And
in which Queen Mary's attempt to suppress the Reformation had just
occasioned a fresh round of Protestant barbecue.
As I like to say, that was then, this is now. You can't judge people from the past with the standards of the present. As Reformation figures go, Cromwell was pretty mild. There's no evidence that he ordered his troops' slaughter of the defenders of Drogheda, which in any case was permitted (shockingly enough!) by the then-accepted laws of war pertaining to "obstinate defense."
Bottom line, I'm still glad Cromwell (and Cranmer and Ridley and Latimer and others) made Britain a Protestant nation. The Catholic Church had gotten out of line, and needed to be put in its place, i.e., away from the levers of political power and back where it belonged creating beautiful hymns, cathedrals, and intellectual theology. The Vatican policy referenced in this article inclines me to believe the RCC hierarchy may need another good Roundhead smackdown these days.
As I like to say, that was then, this is now. You can't judge people from the past with the standards of the present. As Reformation figures go, Cromwell was pretty mild. There's no evidence that he ordered his troops' slaughter of the defenders of Drogheda, which in any case was permitted (shockingly enough!) by the then-accepted laws of war pertaining to "obstinate defense."
Bottom line, I'm still glad Cromwell (and Cranmer and Ridley and Latimer and others) made Britain a Protestant nation. The Catholic Church had gotten out of line, and needed to be put in its place, i.e., away from the levers of political power and back where it belonged creating beautiful hymns, cathedrals, and intellectual theology. The Vatican policy referenced in this article inclines me to believe the RCC hierarchy may need another good Roundhead smackdown these days.
David P | 6:47 p.m. May 5, 2008
Orion stated:
"orion | 6:19 a.m. May 4, 2008
I would think there would be a cry of outrage among the LDS folk if Catholics suddenly baptized deceased, life-long, temple worthy, LDS members. How about church prophets? How about those who died while in service of the LDS Church?"
Quite the opposite is true. I wish there were something the Catholics could offer as a countermeasure to the proxy baptism performed by the LDS faithful.
I'd gladly hand them a list of the names which I have submitted for proxy ordinances in the LDS temple, so that the Catholic church could perform whatever prayer or rebaptism they wished to perform.
Because I don't recognize any such prayer or baptism as valid or binding, I see absolutely no harm in it.
The LDS church has never sought to discourage practicing buddhists, for example, from performing rites on behalf of Mormon, or even Buddhist ancestors whose names have been submitted for proxy ordinances in the LDS temple.
It's none of our affair what the Buddhists do.
However, we consider it our obligation to collect, share, and preserve vital records for the entire family of man. We bear this enormous expense gladly.
"orion | 6:19 a.m. May 4, 2008
I would think there would be a cry of outrage among the LDS folk if Catholics suddenly baptized deceased, life-long, temple worthy, LDS members. How about church prophets? How about those who died while in service of the LDS Church?"
Quite the opposite is true. I wish there were something the Catholics could offer as a countermeasure to the proxy baptism performed by the LDS faithful.
I'd gladly hand them a list of the names which I have submitted for proxy ordinances in the LDS temple, so that the Catholic church could perform whatever prayer or rebaptism they wished to perform.
Because I don't recognize any such prayer or baptism as valid or binding, I see absolutely no harm in it.
The LDS church has never sought to discourage practicing buddhists, for example, from performing rites on behalf of Mormon, or even Buddhist ancestors whose names have been submitted for proxy ordinances in the LDS temple.
It's none of our affair what the Buddhists do.
However, we consider it our obligation to collect, share, and preserve vital records for the entire family of man. We bear this enormous expense gladly.
Michael | 6:47 p.m. May 5, 2008
I, too, am sad this blog has become a mud-slinging session and has failed to
produce a more respectful, logical dialog.
To the non-LDS in Utah, please realize that Mormons experience far worse discrimination in areas where they are the minority among a predominant religion. Italy is one example, and the slander comes from the highest levels of media and government. Please consider this before getting so defensive. You might not have an argument to stand on.
To the LDS in Utah, your religion promotes a higher standard of interaction with other faiths than we've seen in this blog.
To Catholics who have touted their "sacred dead," how can you historically make a claim that your people died believing in their faith? Catholicism is large and powerful, but it has dealt a heavy blow of death and tyranny to become such. Crusades, inquisitions, torture, conquistadors, Counter-reformations. It is irrational to make such a claim for people who aren't here to speak for themselves? So Mormons want to know about their ancestors, or they perform a baptism for great-great-great grandma, which she can "accept or reject." What's the big deal? How many have been forced to accept Catholicism historically?
To the non-LDS in Utah, please realize that Mormons experience far worse discrimination in areas where they are the minority among a predominant religion. Italy is one example, and the slander comes from the highest levels of media and government. Please consider this before getting so defensive. You might not have an argument to stand on.
To the LDS in Utah, your religion promotes a higher standard of interaction with other faiths than we've seen in this blog.
To Catholics who have touted their "sacred dead," how can you historically make a claim that your people died believing in their faith? Catholicism is large and powerful, but it has dealt a heavy blow of death and tyranny to become such. Crusades, inquisitions, torture, conquistadors, Counter-reformations. It is irrational to make such a claim for people who aren't here to speak for themselves? So Mormons want to know about their ancestors, or they perform a baptism for great-great-great grandma, which she can "accept or reject." What's the big deal? How many have been forced to accept Catholicism historically?
RE: bj | 6:49 p.m. May 5, 2008
um hmmm
Not a Catholic | 6:56 p.m. May 5, 2008
or LDS but some of the messages I'm reading here give me a very negative
image of the LDS.
I can easily see how it can be considered disrespectful to the dead by their families especially if the deceased was a devout.
The Catholic Church can trace its lineage back to Jesus Christ who appointed St. Peter as the first pope. This line of popes has continued unbroken for almost 2,000 years and for the person that said the "worship" Mary, they revere Mary.
As an agnostic, I don't hold the Christian system of beliefs to be the "the truth" but obviously many here don't realize that they do the LDS a disservice with their postings.
I can easily see how it can be considered disrespectful to the dead by their families especially if the deceased was a devout.
The Catholic Church can trace its lineage back to Jesus Christ who appointed St. Peter as the first pope. This line of popes has continued unbroken for almost 2,000 years and for the person that said the "worship" Mary, they revere Mary.
As an agnostic, I don't hold the Christian system of beliefs to be the "the truth" but obviously many here don't realize that they do the LDS a disservice with their postings.
charles | 7:01 p.m. May 5, 2008
The mormons just can't keep their nose out of other people's business,
even after they are dead.
Wendy | 7:20 p.m. May 5, 2008
This is to CUTS BOTH WAYS: No, you are wrong. The LDS church would not respond
at all to FLDS re-doing temple work. Why? Because we know it would be of no
effect! They have no priesthood authority in the FLDS church to do any temple
work--or anything else for that matter.
Marie | 7:20 p.m. May 5, 2008
Shall we toss the Catholic priests and nuns out of the Family History centers?
The number one patron of the FH center in South Bend, Indiana (go Irish!) is a
Notre Dame University Priest. He's there for HOURS every day.
Even Catholics like genealogy...
Even Catholics like genealogy...
Susan G | 7:26 p.m. May 5, 2008
Beautifully said.
"For The Love... | 4:38 p.m. May 5, 2008
For the love, folks, show a little respect and humility in what you post for the world to read. I am active LDS, but Mormons do not have the market cornered on goodness or spirituality, nor do we have a free pass to ignore the often understandable concerns of those not of our faith.
Your church leaders would never encourage you to defend your faith in the manner that many, if not most, of the posters here are attempting. It does much more harm than good.
Explain, yes. Attack or condemn, no. We can disagree without being disagreeable, as our leaders have often taught us. Let's make some small effort to put ourselves in the shoes of those whose beliefs differ from our own.
"For The Love... | 4:38 p.m. May 5, 2008
For the love, folks, show a little respect and humility in what you post for the world to read. I am active LDS, but Mormons do not have the market cornered on goodness or spirituality, nor do we have a free pass to ignore the often understandable concerns of those not of our faith.
Your church leaders would never encourage you to defend your faith in the manner that many, if not most, of the posters here are attempting. It does much more harm than good.
Explain, yes. Attack or condemn, no. We can disagree without being disagreeable, as our leaders have often taught us. Let's make some small effort to put ourselves in the shoes of those whose beliefs differ from our own.
To: Marie | 7:30 p.m. May 5, 2008
I don't think genealogy is the problem. It's imposing one's
beliefs on the deceased whose families probably don't appreciate. Please
tell me that you're kidding.
aj arizona | 7:34 p.m. May 5, 2008
At this hospital, Holy Cross, SLC, Utah, and at that time, early 1950's,
these Nuns had no authority, they needed a Priest. That was their declared
policy.
And Catholic positions have never changed in 5 years?
The larger point is, Religions disagree every day on points of doctrine. That doesn't mean you throw down the gauntlet every time you may disagree.
The Catholic Church has picked a fight with an ally, where one was not necessary.
They are trying to dictate to another Church what they can and cannot believe. A doctrine which is biblical, by the way. 1 Cor. 15:29 & John 3:5.
If the Lord says you cannot enter his Kingdom, without baptism, where is your provision for those who never were?
Mormons don't believe in the Cross or the Crucifix as jewelery. They don't use rosary beads to keep count of prayers. They don't believe the Eucharest turns wine and a wafer into Christ's blood and flesh, Literally.
Has the Mormon Church ever given an Edict, prohibiting the selling of Gold and Silver and beads and grapes and wheat, which can be used for Catholic practices which the Mormons don't agree with?
And Catholic positions have never changed in 5 years?
The larger point is, Religions disagree every day on points of doctrine. That doesn't mean you throw down the gauntlet every time you may disagree.
The Catholic Church has picked a fight with an ally, where one was not necessary.
They are trying to dictate to another Church what they can and cannot believe. A doctrine which is biblical, by the way. 1 Cor. 15:29 & John 3:5.
If the Lord says you cannot enter his Kingdom, without baptism, where is your provision for those who never were?
Mormons don't believe in the Cross or the Crucifix as jewelery. They don't use rosary beads to keep count of prayers. They don't believe the Eucharest turns wine and a wafer into Christ's blood and flesh, Literally.
Has the Mormon Church ever given an Edict, prohibiting the selling of Gold and Silver and beads and grapes and wheat, which can be used for Catholic practices which the Mormons don't agree with?
aj arizona | 7:37 p.m. May 5, 2008
Rome looks pretty silly on this one and by expressing the reason behind their
actions, it has proven they are telling another faith what they can and cannot
believe.
For fifteen hundred years the Church was the State. There was no seperation. Records which were lost in fires, or floods, fortunately, because of the Mormon's efforts, were preserved before they were lost.
My wifes entire Family tree on her fathers side is Italian, we have gone back 6 generations, a seven year effort. Thanks to these precious records. Our Catholic cousins, back East, have needed to show their lineage in order to qualify for their jobs in Italy. When they needed the information, we had it for them.
The value of these records are not just for Mormons. The LDS Church indexed the entire Ellis Island records, for the World to cherish, there is a plaque in the main hall, thanking the Church for their efforts. The African American bank records were indexed for the world to enjoy, without these, most African Americans would be at a dead stop on their family histories.
These records belong to the FAMILY OF MAN, of which we all belong.
For fifteen hundred years the Church was the State. There was no seperation. Records which were lost in fires, or floods, fortunately, because of the Mormon's efforts, were preserved before they were lost.
My wifes entire Family tree on her fathers side is Italian, we have gone back 6 generations, a seven year effort. Thanks to these precious records. Our Catholic cousins, back East, have needed to show their lineage in order to qualify for their jobs in Italy. When they needed the information, we had it for them.
The value of these records are not just for Mormons. The LDS Church indexed the entire Ellis Island records, for the World to cherish, there is a plaque in the main hall, thanking the Church for their efforts. The African American bank records were indexed for the world to enjoy, without these, most African Americans would be at a dead stop on their family histories.
These records belong to the FAMILY OF MAN, of which we all belong.
aj arizona | 7:37 p.m. May 5, 2008
If the Pope wants to take his ball and go home, then so be it. The World is
poorer for it.
As for the Mormons, their records are open for the World to share, free of charge, whether you subscribe to
their beliefs or not.
As for the Mormons, their records are open for the World to share, free of charge, whether you subscribe to
their beliefs or not.
Chris Plummer | 7:39 p.m. May 5, 2008
A lot of Mormons posting are saying that no-one should care about baptisms for
the dead that they are doing to devout persons of other religions.
Sounds to me like two VERY touchy subject. Religion and dead relatives. Are you really surprised that people are getting offended. Those two subjects can get two people fist fighting and/or killing in a matter of seconds if the correct buttons are pushed. Treat other peoples religions and dead relatives with respect, something this comments sections hasn't done.
Sounds to me like two VERY touchy subject. Religion and dead relatives. Are you really surprised that people are getting offended. Those two subjects can get two people fist fighting and/or killing in a matter of seconds if the correct buttons are pushed. Treat other peoples religions and dead relatives with respect, something this comments sections hasn't done.
Dead aren't really dead | 7:45 p.m. May 5, 2008
When people die, they no longer have a physical body! Their spirits existed
before they came to earth to receive a body and their spirits continue to exist
even after they lose their body. Death has no true hold on anyone anymore
because Christ died and was resurrected. Resurrection means he got his body and
his spirit back. No one got their bodies back until he got His back. Now,
because of Jesus Christ, everyone gets their bodies back. But, Not everyone
gets to return to the presence of God! Most people don't get it, but the
CoJCoLDS knows that the dead aren't dead. In fact, many dead persons
appear to the living asking them to do their work for them. Unless you have had
this experience, you don't understand the truthfulness of it.
In fact, why does non-members act as though their dead are dead? They are NOT! And if they come to a living person, then they have their permission don't they? These dead come to faithful and inspire them where to find their information. It doesn't matter where it is, they know where their information is. And they lead living persons to it, won't hinder God's work.
In fact, why does non-members act as though their dead are dead? They are NOT! And if they come to a living person, then they have their permission don't they? These dead come to faithful and inspire them where to find their information. It doesn't matter where it is, they know where their information is. And they lead living persons to it, won't hinder God's work.
Aimee | 7:55 p.m. May 5, 2008
Julie,
Maybe it's because it's forbidden in the New Testament by St. Paul to baptize for the dead. If you read the Holy Bible more than the Book of Mormon you would find that out.
Maybe it's because it's forbidden in the New Testament by St. Paul to baptize for the dead. If you read the Holy Bible more than the Book of Mormon you would find that out.
Halcyon | 8:03 p.m. May 5, 2008
Why do the Mormons think they have a right to have copies of all the records in
the world. They aren't *your* records. Get over it!
Thomas | 8:13 p.m. May 5, 2008
Aimee -- What translation are you using? Neither the KJV nor the NIV -- the
only translations I'm very familiar with -- come anywhere close to
"forbidding" the practice. To the contrary, the text (1 Corinthians
15:29) is hard to interpret in any other way than indicating that Corinthian
Christians were engaged in baptism for the dead, and that Paul was not
criticizing them.
I'd be happy to hear your explanation of how Paul actually forbids the practice.
I'd be happy to hear your explanation of how Paul actually forbids the practice.
Patty | 8:16 p.m. May 5, 2008
This has everything to do with respect. If I wanted to be baptized a Mormon I
would do so while I�m alive. What makes anyone feel they
are better or know better than I do when it comes to my wishes?
Thomas | 8:31 p.m. May 5, 2008
Patty -- The Mormon position is that you may have a clearer understanding of
what you really want once God shows it to you when you're dead.
Like or not, that strikes me as pretty rational. As Paul said, on the earth we see and know things only in part. Mormons who believe their religion is correct naturally believe that its correctness will be made clear in the eternities, once people's knowledge is more complete.
And they must be correct -- I've never heard a dead person complain about being subjected to posthumous Mormon baptism. ;)
Like or not, that strikes me as pretty rational. As Paul said, on the earth we see and know things only in part. Mormons who believe their religion is correct naturally believe that its correctness will be made clear in the eternities, once people's knowledge is more complete.
And they must be correct -- I've never heard a dead person complain about being subjected to posthumous Mormon baptism. ;)
Amber | 8:32 p.m. May 5, 2008
"Like the Jews, apparently he must believe in the LDS doctrine of baptism
for the dead and sealings of families."
Jews do NOT belive in the doctrine of baptism for the dead and sealings of families. Find out the facts before you post.
Jews do NOT belive in the doctrine of baptism for the dead and sealings of families. Find out the facts before you post.
Thomas | 8:43 p.m. May 5, 2008
Amber -- Read the referenced post a second time, this time with your irony
detector turned on.
I've got an idea | 8:44 p.m. May 5, 2008
Why not just baptize everyone into every conceivable religion so that when
they're dead they're covered since none of the others count and,
apparently, the wishes of the individual don't either?
mary anne | 8:45 p.m. May 5, 2008
Based on what i have read today in this forum, I think that there is great
hostility between Mormons and Catholics. It also appears that the Catholic
Church has acted within its rights. I do not hear of anyone suing the church to
get at the records.
Mormons also like to think they are now "Christians," part of the worldwide Christian movement, but the Catholic church has set that thought aside, hasn't it. Pope drew a line in the sand.
Some have written about how these two Christian bodies have been torn asunder by the Catholic orders. Au contraire, it was never together. I recall a childhood where Mormons would always tell the Catholics that the Catholics were headed straight to hell.
So, relax. The RC has the records, the world continues to spin, and roses still bloom in the spring. Nothing has actually changed, but some things are more out in the open.
Mormons also like to think they are now "Christians," part of the worldwide Christian movement, but the Catholic church has set that thought aside, hasn't it. Pope drew a line in the sand.
Some have written about how these two Christian bodies have been torn asunder by the Catholic orders. Au contraire, it was never together. I recall a childhood where Mormons would always tell the Catholics that the Catholics were headed straight to hell.
So, relax. The RC has the records, the world continues to spin, and roses still bloom in the spring. Nothing has actually changed, but some things are more out in the open.
Patty | 8:49 p.m. May 5, 2008
Thomas: I have lived in Utah a long time. This will be one more why of Mormons
trying to make non-Mormon feel like something is wrong with them. You may feel
it�s your right to do this. Guess what,
it�s within my rights to say back off. Believe what you
want, but don�t try to take away my right to do the same.
In the tunnel | 8:51 p.m. May 5, 2008
Thomas
You're educated and intelligent, yet you've spent countless hours looking in to religion for answers. You're the only one posting here who has any hope. Free yourself from your past.
You're educated and intelligent, yet you've spent countless hours looking in to religion for answers. You're the only one posting here who has any hope. Free yourself from your past.
Anonymous | 8:52 p.m. May 5, 2008
You LDS are hypocrites!
People who believe differently than you are constantly performing ceremonies and rites that you find offensive. Take Burning Man, for example. People of other faiths dress in Mormon Temple clothes and depict their own interpretations of the Temple ordinances. It is very instructive, but I have NEVER met a Mormon who is not offended by it!
So don't tell me you Mormons would not be offended if other churches did that! You are liars and hypocrites!
People who believe differently than you are constantly performing ceremonies and rites that you find offensive. Take Burning Man, for example. People of other faiths dress in Mormon Temple clothes and depict their own interpretations of the Temple ordinances. It is very instructive, but I have NEVER met a Mormon who is not offended by it!
So don't tell me you Mormons would not be offended if other churches did that! You are liars and hypocrites!
patty | 8:55 p.m. May 5, 2008
Thomas: I have lived in Utah a long time. I know how this goes. Non-Mormons are
wrong in your eyes.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Editorial: Food is not the enemy 12:17 a.m.
- U.S. must has work in Afghanistan 12:17 a.m.
- The winners and the losers 12:17 a.m.
- Beauty is not the same as TV 12:17 a.m.
- Letters: Civility needed 12:17 a.m.
- Letters: Global warming a plot 12:17 a.m.
- Letters: Ethics petition a fraud 12:17 a.m.
- Letters: Reckless imbalance 12:17 a.m.
- Letters: No constitutional right 12:17 a.m.
- Elder Ballard makes return visit 12:14 a.m.
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
264 - Protests against Phoenix LDS temple211
- Thunder rolls by Jazz136
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin133
- Boys basketball rankings128
- Editorial: Poor welcome for Palin112
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies109
- Letters: Trump card for believers93
- Rivalry Week is highly profane84
- Utah, BYU are top choices for bowls75
I wanted to tell them not to go. I dropped subtle hints. "My money is on...
When I was a kid, I worshipped my grandpa. He was undoubtedly my hero....
Latest comments
"You are the very epitome of self-indulgence liberal crassness. You care...
I thought it was a great parade. Isn't it the only one in Salt Lake County?...
is struggling in some aspects of his game. We saw what he did last year early...
Having explored caves as a youth and spent 31 yrs working occasionally...
How do the Utes continue to do this? They are bad enough to lose to lousy...
A little help here. Harmon says Utah should be on a 3-0 win streak. I assume...
disgruntled parents need to stay off the blogs...
Honk if you intercepted Max Hall.
however it pertinent to look at their schedule and then look at ours. Because...
and there are no ute fans, only bandwagon fans, nice try though
Advertisements
Your church leaders would never encourage you to defend your faith in the manner that many, if not most, of the posters here are attempting. It does much more harm than good.
Explain, yes. Attack or condemn, no. We can disagree without being disagreeable, as our leaders have often taught us. Let's make some small effort to put ourselves in the shoes of those whose beliefs differ from our own.