Deseret News | Catholics told not to give LDS parish data

Reader comments
Catholics told not to give LDS parish data

777 comments | Read story

AZLDSGuy | 12:22 p.m. May 4, 2008

agree - What Rights??? hmmm the same God given rights that you have and share. The right to choose and to speak freely. I respect your choices please be an adult and share the same respect.

mom | 12:27 p.m. May 4, 2008

I think the majority of responders are missing the point. The mormon practice is disgusting and appears arrogant. I am not Catholic, but I don't believe I have ever heard of them attempting to convert dead mormons by baptising them. Why should the Catholics (or ANY self respecting entity) assist mormons in this bizarre practice?

Marilyn | 12:28 p.m. May 4, 2008

I am LDS. I have a friend who is Catholic and suffering with MS. In 2000 I went to Israel with my husband. While visiting the Wailing Wall, I wrote my friend's name on a piece of paper and pushed it into a hole in the wall, just as others were doing. A prayer is a prayer is a prayer. God hears them all. It was a labor of love and of faith. When I told my friend what I had done she was grateful. Baptism of those who have passed on is another demonstration of love and faith. The Church is blessing people, according to their (our) beliefs.I believe the Pope needs to rethink his decision.

Comments continue below

Plausibility of baptising all | 12:32 p.m. May 4, 2008

Someone earlier mentioned that it was implausible for the church to baptize for the dead everyone who ever lived. Estimates of this number are on the order of 50 to 100 billion people, so MATHEMATICALLY speaking, if 100 billion people needed to be baptized, and each temple could do 100 ordinances per hour, then in order to get the ordinances of every person ever lived done in the time period of ONE CENTURY (100 years) then it would require a mere 1140 temples each working 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for 100 years. Tweak that number to about 120 per hour and only 6 days a week gets roughly the same number, if you're worried about keeping the Sabbath day holy. :-) Interesting thought-experiment. This is assuming, of course, that all these records are available and that members of the church are willing to put the time and effort into working at the temple.

Regardless, I believe it is a very important and needful thing, equally needful to helping the living. God knows all the precise reasons, but it's important for each member to receive this testimony for themselves.

DeseretratinNC | 12:38 p.m. May 4, 2008

Blah Blah Blah!! Mormon v. Non-mormon. Anything to call one another a name or start an arguement. I've watched it for 50+ years, like 2 children on the playground fighting over a toy. Sad it is I say, sad it is!

Clark Larsen | 12:38 p.m. May 4, 2008

PEOPLE! PEOPLE! Let's all just calm down for a second and take a deep breath.

Okay, now let's try and look at this calmly and objectively. The fact is, the Catholic Church, like any religion, has a right to keep their records confidential. No one should dispute that. To my fellow LDS Church members, let's give the General Authorities and Family History leaders time to work out the details of this request.

I seriously doubt this will bring Family History work to a hault. Of course, things will have to be altered, but let's not hit the panic button, okay?

To Catholic 12:11 - Thank you for your comments. My only response would be this. If, as a Latter-day Saint, someone from another faith were to baptize my deceased family members in their temple, I would honestly NOT BE offended. It would in no way take away from the good name of my ancestors, and why should it? And if someone from another church wanted to baptize me, after I died, why would I care? I'm dead.

Some people may be offended, but I simply would not be.

Vernal Roid | 12:39 p.m. May 4, 2008

So much Hate over religion. Hummmmmm

Freeman | 12:48 p.m. May 4, 2008

I say we settle this on the football field: BYU vs. Notre Dame. The winner gets the rights to the records.

Anonymous | 12:57 p.m. May 4, 2008

Vatican Officials need to mind their own business and allow this work to continue. That also includes Pope Benedict; He needs to mind his own business.

Freddie | 1:03 p.m. May 4, 2008

>>I Corinthians 15:29 Baptism for the dead, If is the most glorious subject, why did Paul exclude himself by saying "they" practice it and not "we" or "I" practice it? He was addressing an early cultic practice to prove the Resurrection. no second chance(Hebrews 9:27)<<

A cult, you say?

So, let's see. Paul was saying, essentially, "see that cultic group over there who are baptizing for their dead? That certainly proves there is a resurrection."

Absurd!

LdG | 1:02 p.m. May 4, 2008

Freeman, you aren't LDS are you? Because I don't think that BYU (of recent years) really stands a chance in that contest. :)

Jon | 1:04 p.m. May 4, 2008

I wouldn't care if Catholics or Mormons started praying for my soul or doing ordinances for me after I die. I could use all the help I can get. By making an issue out of this, all the Catholics are doing are legitimizing the practice.

Truth Sayer | 1:12 p.m. May 4, 2008

The Apostle Paul never taught baptism for the dead and "endless geneologies" were also condemned because there was no point in either practice. Why? Because Christ's supreme sacrifice negatated the laws and rituals of the Cld Covenant---all such practices were a waste of time!

The atonement of Christ is all we need for Salvation--religion just adds to God's word more unneeded laws and rituals.

This is what separates true Christianity from "religion" (as opposed to Christianity). In Christ, "it is finished." With religion it's an endless (and pointless) treadmill of works.

Just accept Salvation through Christ folks---baptism for the dead is just one of many "dead works" that help no one! Do your research (very easy to prove that baptism for the dead was only practiced by cults and sects that were not true Christianity.

Believe what you wish about baptism for the dead, but if you would stop being spoonfed by religious bondage and do your own research on the topic, you will easily find out that the practice was not a Christian practice at all!

just wondering | 1:14 p.m. May 4, 2008

So, If Mormons believe in the resurrection, why don't you guys wait till the dead rise to decide for themselves if they want to be Mormons?

RE: Anonymous | 1:21 p.m. May 4, 2008

"Vatican Officials need to mind their own business''...

Are you joking?

ajarizona | 1:21 p.m. May 4, 2008

I suspect the Catholics greatest backlash will not come from the Mormons, but from those Catholics who will also be shut out from doing their family
trees. Most will find it difficult to take trips to Italy, Germany, Poland etc. to search records.

If you want to have a ceremony for my soul, by whatever means, spinning three times, bouncing a ball off your head and eating rice cakes, on and off
for three days, or whatever, and you feel by doing so you are helping my eternal soul, well, then, knock yourself out.

To me, I may feel you're wasting your time, but I am certainly not going to be offended. Rather, I would be flattered that you cared enough about me to
care, misguided as I may find you to be.

The names to the Genealogical data-base are not automatically submitted for Temple work, families must submit them.

People from all over the World use this data base, a free gift from the Mormons to anybody who needs to use it, for whatever reason, and they do, by the millions.

Catholics, Jews, Protestants etc. hold conventions in SLC to use this great data base.

Grow up, Rome.

pj | 1:32 p.m. May 4, 2008

Nice try truth sayer!

Your argument is weak and you still cannot explain,
John 3:5 with 1 Cor. 15:29, let alone Malachi.

The hearts have been turned to the Fathers and the Fathers to the children. It's rolling forth, baby.

Just relax in your ignorance and don't you fret one iota, for even you will have your work done and you will be able to exercise your own agency to choose.

Oh, and one more thing, Faith without works is dead and we are indeed saved by grace, AFTER all we can do.

good day PJ

Carol | 1:34 p.m. May 4, 2008

When my LDS son was dying of cancer some years ago an elderly non-LDS couple came to him in his place of business asking if it was alright if they placed his name in their church prayer circle, My son's response was yes they could. He said to me later, "Mom, faith is faith and I thought it very touching they cared enough for me to do that"

And in response to an earlier post- would I care if the FLDS rebaptized my deceased family members? Nope- I would not consider it necessary but I would also know it would not do any harm.

And regardless of what faith or none at all, I am grateful the FHL archives are open to any one who wants to know about their heritage.

The Afterlife Difference | 1:35 p.m. May 4, 2008

I think much of the problem with this lies in the LDS belief that everyone (minus the very few who become Sons of Perdition) will have an opportunity to accept the Gospel after this life. Even those LDS who were baptized and fell away will continue to have opportunities to repent and progress after death. This is without a doubt my very favorite LDS doctrine and I believe is an extremely compassionate doctrine reflecting a compassionate God. We do not believe our final reward is based soley on this life. We believe this life is in reality only a blip in comparison to the pre-existence and afterlife - both of which include decisions and progression that affect what we are to eventually become. I have always struggled with the alternate belief that this life is all one has - what a narrow belief desregarding individual circumstances that only God can judge. But this difference is largely at the heart of this dispute. LDS believe they are assisting deceased of all backgrounds in their CONTINUING journey and decisions. Others believe the journey and accompanying eternal decisions have been made while on earth and are complete. How to bridge that is key.

I wouldn't mind | 1:35 p.m. May 4, 2008

I wouldn't mind if someone from another faith posthumously baptized me. I personally believe it wouldn't make a difference one way or another. A few on here have claimed the LDS church would make a big deal if another church did what we do. We wouldn't care. Try us. We believe our baptism is done with the proper authority and anything else would be a gesture of love, but take none effect.

We also believe the deceased will choose for themselves to accept or reject the ordinance. Therefore, we are not making decisions for them. We are simply giving them a chance to receive something they weren't able to receive during their time on earth.

This doctrine may sound strange, but I won't apologize for it. I believe it's true, and I believe it shows the mercy of an all-loving Father in Heaven.

Yes or No? Love an Answer | 1:47 p.m. May 4, 2008

I am LDS and do not have the answer to this question but honestly wonder:

If the LDS Church were asked to provide copies of identifying deceased member records (birth, blessing, marriage, sealing, death, etc.)for the purpose of FLDS plural marriage sealings, or similar Scientology or Wicken ordinances, WOULD THE CHURCH WILLINGLY AND KNOWINGLY PROVIDE THOSE? I know the Church would not make an issue of that occuring in general without their assistance - but would the Church actually provide records and documents to knowingly assist in that? The Catholic Church is not demanding that baptisms for the dead stop. They are simply requiring that records not be provided to actively assist in the ordinance. Rather than the defensiveness I am reading, I would love to hear whether we believe the Church would actively and knowingly assist in FLDS, Scientology or Wicken cermonies for LDS deceased? (and rememeber, the Catholic Church veiws us no differently than we view those groups)

Anonymous | 1:59 p.m. May 4, 2008

what gives the mormon church the right to do anything with these records other than to make them available for genealogy. the catholic church is well within their right do say and do what they want with their records. it is an invasion of privacy. i was raised catholic then became a mormon. their marriages are for time only. maybe they don't want the prospect of an eternal marriage. that is their right. how would mormons feel if some church from russia decided to butt in like the mormons do. my experience of the church is, mormons can only see what view point, theirs.

zzman | 2:13 p.m. May 4, 2008

Use the records for family history/geneological research and stop insulting the dead. The Mormon Church oversteps on this one. Stop insulting people by performing Mormon ordinances and respect the dead--be they Jews, Protestants, Catholics or whatever. It's pretty simple! Seems that a few Mormon posters above understand how insulting this is.

DRJ | 2:17 p.m. May 4, 2008

So what...who cares? There are a lot more important things in the world to worry about right now than who's baptizing whom. Religion is all faith based. No one from any religion can show absolute irrefutable proof that any one religion is the "true church of god." It's all about what each person believes. As long as you're comfortable with what you believe, then so be it. Just don't try to force your beliefs on others who are not interested.

re: yes or no | 2:22 p.m. May 4, 2008

I think you know the answer. The Church would not want to knowingly assist the efforts of a cult to baptize LDS members.

I wonder if all these people who say they wouldnï¿½t mind if another church baptized them posthumously would feel the same way if the Catholic Church made it a practice to send priests to the deathbeds of LDS people to perform baptismal rites without consent, as an expression of ï¿½love and faith.ï¿½

Alan | 2:45 p.m. May 4, 2008

Being LDS, I don't agree with the Catholic church's position on this matter. However, LDS people need to be careful before being offended at this action. LDS baptism for the dead basically says that baptisms performed by other faiths are less than valid. That's taught specifically by the LDS church, based on the concept that one must have authority given by God to act in His name. Perhaps the Catholic leadership feels that giving names to LDS people undermines the weight of Catholic baptism. (In the LDS Church, we have policy and tradition that makes sure nothing takes the place of or replaces a temple marriage, for the same reason.)

If we react angrily towards the Catholic church, then is baptism for the dead in temples really the gift of love we claim it is? We, like those we believe are waiting for work to be done on their behalf, may need to exercise patience, faith, hope and tolerance.

Anonymous | 2:49 p.m. May 4, 2008

I'm LDS and if some other group wanted to rebaptize me after I am dead (Church of Satan or FLDS or whoever), go ahead, it won't mean anything. Only baptism by the proper authority has meaning. So the argument that the LDS would get mad if someone else were doing the same to us is invalid.

Kim Greenland | 2:50 p.m. May 4, 2008

The work for the the ancestors is a great work. It has to be done now or later. When the Mormon church only amounted 1 million members after the II ww they went to the European countries and got permission to microfilm the churchbooks. In return the countries received a copy. At that time the Mormon Church was a curiosum.
When the Church now as a visible actor in religion seeks permission with the big religions there is an opposition. They must be nerveous in one way or another to condone the principle. Even it is a principle for concern for those who have lived without beeing ex. baptized in the past.

re: Non Mormon | 2:56 p.m. May 4, 2008

Yes, you are trying to speak for the dead. You are the one being arrogant here. Let's speak metaphorically. Imagine death is a big desert. nobody wants to go there but it's inevitable. everybody ends up in the desert either able to progress to a desirable destination or to suffer. But in order to progress they need food. We are placing food at the edge of the desert (we can't go into the desert without suffering death). They can take the food and move on or not. It's their choice. But the food has mushrooms and you find that offensive (because mushrooms are vile). So you are trying to compel us to not put the food out because it is disrespectful to those in the desert. The desert people are completely unaffected by our mushroom laden food unless they take it, but you don't even want to afford them the opportunity one way or another. We at least provide them a choice. You do not. It is you who is arrogant.

Hannahsrock1 | 2:57 p.m. May 4, 2008

As an LDS member, this is one of those times when I simply say "If you don't believe in proxy ordinations, then why should you care if we do them?" If it's a matter of protecting parrish privacy that's one thing but if it's a matter of not sharing information which, in large part, is public anyway, that is another.

This will strain relations between the two churches for sure and the LDS church will gather the information it seeks another way.

F | 3:00 p.m. May 4, 2008

Some of the comments are extremely disrespectful to the Catholic church. They do have the right to keep their records confidential. As would the Mormon church if they chose to do so. As earlier comments suggested, it's true, baptisms for the dead don't bother some people. But they bother a lot of other people who believe it's disrespectful to baptize them to a church they were not affiliated with, nor wanted to be affiliated with. Like most of you who are very devout in your faith, some of these people that are chosen to be baptized were also very devout in whatever faith they chose. It's almost like the LDS church is saying the faith they chose when alive wasn't acceptable, but now they can rest easy. The Catholic church has a right to keep their files confidential. If people chose not to be baptized to the LDS church when they were alive, there is a very high chance, they and their familes, wouldn't appreciate you baptizing them now. Just like I'm sure many of you who are LDS would not want to be baptized a Catholic when you are deceased.

Matt Connelly | 3:01 p.m. May 4, 2008

As a Mormon I find these comments from the Vatican not only extremely offensive, but also extremely uneccesary. Where is the spirit of love and understanding here? Words like "erroneous" and "detrimental practice" are not loving words but divisive and arrogant words. Didn't the Pope just come to America proclaiming the need for human love and tolerance of those who may believe differently? I find the highest degree of hipocrisy in this letter. Besides, let's get a couple things straight. First, Mormons are major geneaology buffs. Not all work they do is intended for post-humous baptism. Second, even if the records are used for post-humous baptisms, why does the Catholic Church care? Is this harming anyone? Is this disrespecting anyone? The answer, of course, is none of the above. Let me be clear. This action from the Vatican is completely out of line. Their words and actions go contrary to the spirit of love encouraged by Jesus Christ. They owe the Mormon Church and its members an apology.

whatever | 3:07 p.m. May 4, 2008

The posts that claim that other churches are suddenly nervous or worried therefore proving the Mormon church is right, are funny. It never ceases to amaze how flexible the Mormon argument is.

I think it has only been recently (esp. with the Internet) that other churches have discovered what Mormons do in their temples. While it was known that Mormons researched their ancestry, nobody really understood that they were out to baptize the world, dead or alive.

Youï¿½re free to stick to your own religious faith, but leave everyone else alone.

Agreed. | 3:07 p.m. May 4, 2008

The LDS church baptizing people are they are dead is arrogant. They are saying that the life these people lived were not good enough, and their life wasn't complete because they werne't LDS. Let people rest in peace. And yes, people can rest in peace if they are not LDS.

Common' It's Simple | 3:20 p.m. May 4, 2008

Somone asked earlier if the Mormon Church would do for other religions what the Catholic Church is refusing to do for us. The answer is NO. We would not knowingly give our member records to other Churches for the purpose of doing their work for our dead. It's simple. Stop being hypocritical.

Matteo85 | 3:23 p.m. May 4, 2008

I respect the Pope's decision to do what he did, regardless of how mis-guided I feel it to be personally. Authority and "acceptablility" discussions aside, the Lord's Work will not be hampered by anyone or anything. If the Catholic Church is correct in its doctrines, then its sacraments will have power over the souls of men in the next life. The same applies to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints; if the Lord's Hand is in His Work, then His Hand will prevail, no matter what the Pope or the Prophet might do to the contrary.

Catholic genealogists? | 3:25 p.m. May 4, 2008

You mean, no one who uses the Church's Family History Library, or any of its satellite Family History Centers around the world, is Catholic? What do Catholic genealogists have to say about this? Will they appreciate their own church muddying their genealogical waters? I'd be leaving my parish immediately if they made it hard for me to look up my ancestors.

I'm LDS, and if any other denomination took up this cause and started microfilming and preserving these records to the extent that the Church has, for any reason - including baptizing them Catholic, Baptist, Jehovah's Witness - I'd say, let them go for it. Since their practices carry no weight or authority (to me), who's it going to hurt? In the meantime, valuable records are being saved for those who are interested in family history. I'd be grateful, not acting bratty.

The Popes, Saints, and Mother Theresa all have the same choices in the hereafter that my ancestors have: accept the temple ordinances, or not. It's no affront to their beliefs to offer the ordinances to these people - as someone else said, it's an act of love. What are these Catholic church leaders afraid of?

Not to Worry | 3:29 p.m. May 4, 2008

There is no need for worry. God is able to do his work, in spite of the efforts of man to stop it. This work shall progress forward, and the names of the dead will become available. The church has barely made a dent in the overall work that needs to be accomplished. When the Savior comes again, during the Millennium, this work will move forth unencumbered.

So in the mean time, we as latter day saints, should love our fellowman, and trust in the Savior, whose work this is.

As the Prophet Joseph so eloquently stated, "No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly and independent, till it has penetrated every continent; visited every clime, swept every country and sounded in every ear; till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done." (HC 4:540)

?? | 3:30 p.m. May 4, 2008

John 3:5 - Jesus answered, Verily verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

What happens to those who die without Catholic baptism? What happens to those that died in ancient China or Africa that have never even heard of Jesus Christ? What happens to those that died long before Jesus was even born?

For this reason alone, baptism for the dead is the most merciful doctrine and the only thing that makes sense. On one hand we know that baptism is required. On the other hand, there are so MANY that never even had a chance.
This is just one of the very important reasons why the restored Gospel is the only Christian doctrine on the earth that makes sense.

re;Matt Connelly | 3:32 p.m. May 4, 2008

"This action from the Vatican is completely out of line."

What an arrogant statement. The Catholic church as well as the Mormon church have the right to set policy with regard to their own records. The arrogance and impudence with which you speak makes it clear why many people are offend by Mormons who think that they are so clearly "right", that it's never necessary to consider the views of others before opening a mouth and inserting a foot.

I agree with you to a poing | 3:34 p.m. May 4, 2008

Marilyn. But that is not all the LDS are doing with the names. People have the right to object to the fact that they "baptize them" after death.

Bill | 3:32 p.m. May 4, 2008

The LDS church needs to learn respect for other religions. Until they do, they won't be respected.

Membership/ records | 3:41 p.m. May 4, 2008

Perhaps the Catholics should start their own genealogy society and charge for memberships just like ANCESTRY.COM , who as well have accesses to many world genealogy records. Will the Catholics cut them off as well? I certainly hope not, because I love Ancestry.com.

Howard | 3:42 p.m. May 4, 2008

The Catholics DO baptise the dead--I drove by their cemetery and noticed they had their sprinklers on.

Karl | 3:46 p.m. May 4, 2008

In many cases Catholic parish registers do not exclusively belong to the Catholic church. In many countries Catholic priests are paid by the government and one of their duties is to keep track of names and dates - birth, marriage, death, for the public record. Anyone is entitled to that information.

Genealogist | 3:48 p.m. May 4, 2008

Most of the catholic records from germany have allready a "No circulation to family history centers in Europe." sign. As a german genealogist i`m used to this restrictions. It`s not a question of doctrines, it`s a question of money. It`s more expensive to visit a catholic archive than ordering microfilms in a "Family History Center". In my opinion theyï¿½re also afraid about the new digitalization project of the church and the possible loss of "customers" in their archives. But the letter from rome does not mean for us that they`re closing their doors, you just have to visit their archives in the future and the work for our ancestors will move forward.

Plain and Simple | 3:49 p.m. May 4, 2008

I find it amazing that so may LDS people in this thread just don't get it. But then when you come from the point of view that only you are right, that only you do God's work, that only your religion is the true religion, I can see how that would happen. Here's how it is. Other religions use genealogical records to find out about family history. The LDS church uses them to get information to do baptisms for the dead, which is an insult to people who are not LDS and believe in their own faith. These are Catholic records. They have the right to withhold them from anyone they so choose, including the LDS church. LDS people are accustomed to having their own way in the small state of Utah. Please don't try to impose yourselves on the rest of the world.

Most Hon. Rev. Finkelstein | 3:54 p.m. May 4, 2008

Wow! Look at all the LDS people who don't mind if some other church has them baptized into another faith after they die.

Why wait? Line up! Let's do it now!

Matter | 3:56 p.m. May 4, 2008

Is it not a matter of: I wouldn't mind if someone baptized me into their church but a matter of WOULD the LDS Church hand over your records to the Catholic, Lutheran, Muslim or of course the Church of Satan in order for the baptism (or other ordinances) of those contained within those records.

Rex | 4:03 p.m. May 4, 2008

I have no problem with any church performing any ordinance for my deceased LDS ancestors or Brigham Young. It is showing respect not disrespect. It shows love for their eternal souls. Free agency is a gift and God. Nothing is forced on anyone.

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.