Deseret News | Catholics told not to give LDS parish data

Reader comments
Catholics told not to give LDS parish data

777 comments | Read story

Truth | 8:03 a.m. May 5, 2008

They are CATHOLIC records and they can restrict them if they want.

Perhaps | 8:03 a.m. May 5, 2008

Perhaps if the LDS Church allowed Catholic parents to see their LDS children marry, the distribution of records would not be an issue. Perhaps it is time for the LDS Church to start considering the feelings of others over the needs of self.

Paolo S. | 8:03 a.m. May 5, 2008

I joined the LDS church 17 years ago in Italy and after a month I started to search for my ancestors. The city hall didnï¿½t have the records, the parish did.

Before approaching the parson I faithfully prayed I would not be hindered in doing my research knowing that I was implementing one of the three missions of our church. So I approached the parson and simply told him I was beginning a family research on my ancestors. I then asked him kindly if it was possible to look into the archives. He gave me a suspicious look to which I sincerely responded I had no second intentions at all, and he could trust me. He gave me the keys and asked me to lock myself in while I was doing my search and promptly return the keys once I was done.

I spent four days in that room, and for four days I had no problem in getting the keys: 1) because he trusted me, 2) because the Lord was on my side.

Isnï¿½t this a Marvelous Work and a Wonder? Would the Catholic Church be somehow able to stop it? I donï¿½t think so... This work will continue!

Comments continue below

Andrea Eaton | 8:18 a.m. May 5, 2008

Thank goodness King Henry VIII had the foresight to divorce England from the Catholic Church and the Pope of his time, otherwise information on my whole family would be lost by this latest edict. Oh I forgot, Henry wasn't thinking about me or anyone else when he broke from the Catholic Church, he was thinking about his lust for Ann Bolyn and his Catholic marriage to Catharine who he really wanted to divorce (at least she kept her head, poor, poor Ann). Anyway I'm grateful to Henry.

They are my ancestors | 8:18 a.m. May 5, 2008

I have done genealogy since the mid 1970s and have found much information in Catholic Church records in Germany. Most other parts of my family were Protestants (Huguenots, etc.). The people who I looked for were MY ancestors. They, according to our belief, can do whatever they wish with what is done for them in our temples. If we're wrong it means nothing, has no effect on them, and should not matter one bit to a person of another faith. Most of the my family who I pulled Catholic records for were born 150-250 years ago, no one alive knows anything about them, no privacy issue is violated, no harm is done. Apart from what I may do with the information, many other people simply want to know about their family tree and the Catholic records are excellent records for that purpose. The amassed records of the LDS church are available to all, stored safely for future generations and represent a treasure of immense worth to everyone. It should be viewed as a way to preserve precious records to allow them to be microfilmed and saved from fire, theft, or other harm.

Joyce | 8:19 a.m. May 5, 2008

It won't matter how many Catholic people get baptized by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints who are dead. God forces NO One. They have the choice to accept that baptism or choose Not TO ACCEPT that baptism and the same goes for the Jews who started the whole negative thing.
There will be so many that wish someone had been baptized for them. Sometimes it is their own posterity who do the work for their dead.

The greatest gift our Heavenly Father gave to all of us is the RIGHT TO CHOOSE!

Right On | 8:19 a.m. May 5, 2008

I think we LDS could certainly learn a lot from the Catholic Church. In the LDS Church we NEED something like a HIPAA regulations to protect the privacy of Church information. LDS Church members are the biggest gossips in the world! Because they have a "lay" clergy, common members are called to callings that give them access to private information about others. Ward clerks, Bishoprics, auxiliary callings give access to information about other members' temple worthiness, tithing donations (and therefore income), past Church disciplinary actions, and more. And what do these people do with that information? They GOSSIP! They judge one another harshly. They say things to their buddies in the ward like, "Oh, Brother XYZ makes GOOD money! I have seen his tithing numbers!" They tell their wives and their wives tell their buddies as they go walking in the mornings: "Did you know the Joneses daughter is not getting married in the temple! That figures. This is Brother Jones' second marriage. He was excommunicated once."

If the LDS Church would take the privacy of people's information MUCH more seriously, we would dramatically reduce the GOSSIP in the Church!

Anonymous | 8:25 a.m. May 5, 2008

I think Catholics feel the same way we (LDS) would if we were being baptized Catholic after we were dead?

Former Mormon | 8:33 a.m. May 5, 2008

I was raised in Utah and was Mormon, but converted to Catholicism in 2003. My wife and children are still very active in the Mormon faith. Prior to my conversion I served in numerous capacities including as a full time missionary, member of a Bishopric, Sunday School President, as well as numerous other callings. When I joined the Catholic Church I faced stiff opposition from my local Bishop and Stake President. They visited my home many times and used every rationale that they could think of to dissuade me. I found it hypocritical that they would be so angry when the Mormon Church regularly baptizes members of other faiths without providing a full doctrinal understanding of the belief system. In order to become Catholic I had to attend RCIA for a full year studying about doctrine and my obligations as a Catholic. As a full time LDS missionary we would usually give three very basic memorized discussions and then issue a Baptismal challenge at the end of the third discussion. It was usually a pressure situation where "No" was not accepted as an answer.

No Ownership | 8:37 a.m. May 5, 2008

The Churches have MUCH MORE OWNERSHIP over your ancestors than YOU do! People identify themselves as a member of a Church and that identification holds more power and weight than family ties -- that is why people leave their families in order to be baptized into another Church. This is especially common for people who join the Mormon Church. No other Church is so parasitic upon other Christian Churches than the Mormons. They send their 50,000 missionaries out to create dissatisfaction among Catholics by telling them a distorted story about a "Great Apostasy". Then they rip people away from their families and away from their Church to make them into Mormons. This is offensive enough. But then they want to take these victims of indoctrination and use them as a foothold into the Catholic records so they can do pagan baptisms for the dead. Just because you have the same last name as someone else does not give you "ownership" over them and their records. YOU HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OVER YOUR ANCESTORS!

Mike | 8:41 a.m. May 5, 2008

It's not about the Church. The bottum line is, it's about families being together forever in the eternities as a unit.

ANNON | 8:46 a.m. May 5, 2008

Put your religion aside and look at it from a Non-Mormon's perspective, if that's possible. It is considered and insult, and an a front to the, "affected religion." Mormon's think they are God's gift to the world, when in reality they are no better, nor worse than any other people. It is their perceived feeling of superiority that is being condemned.

Michael | 8:48 a.m. May 5, 2008

Particularly for LDS members in Italy, this move will only aggravate the horrible suspicion and discrimination they deal with. Regarding Catholic objections to LDS baptisms for the dead, the Catholic Church historically has done the SAME practice. They were called "indulgences," except their underlying motives are far more iffy than those of enthusiastic LDS members giving of their time to express something on behalf of their forbears. "Poor people, pay this money and you'll get your ancestors out of purgatory (and we'll be able to build St. Peter's.)"

Franz | 8:53 a.m. May 5, 2008

To Cuts Both Ways: If the FLDS Church or anybody else wants to do baptisms or any other ceremony for me after I'm dead then they are welcome to it. Proxy baptisms have no effect on membership numbers, and is done as an act of love and concern; if other churches care enough to try to save my soul at their considerable expense then go right ahead. Again, there is no benefit to the LDS Church from these baptisms, and there is a substantial expense to copy and preserve the various birth , marriage, death and christening records. Building temples, where these baptisms are done, are not cheap; this is in addition to the infrastructure for family history research (libraries, computers, software). The other churches should be ashamed that they don't care so much. Shame on the Catholic Church for actually hindering this work. I have had respect for the Catholic Church in the past, and still respect the members as good people; if I were a member I would be embarrassed.

Anonymous | 8:56 a.m. May 5, 2008

This is not about Mormons vs Catholics or what belief is the right one. People from both sides actually need to learn to live and let live. It's really getting old. My point here is those records should be public because they are the people's not the Catholic Church's. The parishes were the ones in charge of those record until beginning of the 20th century and those records should be taken and administered by the goverment so the public have access to them. This is like the times when the Bible was only read by the priests until the printer was invented and then the public has access to it. The people is the right owner of those records.

Dutchman | 9:02 a.m. May 5, 2008

Now I know why the German, Elder Uchtdorf, was called as a member of the First Presidency. It sounds like the the two Germans, President Uchtdorf and Pope Benedict need to work this out. Also, I can't believe the number of issues the very capable President Thomas S. Monson has had to deal with since becoming President of the Church. God bless these noble men.

Prophecy | 9:05 a.m. May 5, 2008

This is merely a fulfillment of prophecy in my opinion. Family records should not be ownership of any church. This is information that belongs to the people, not to a given church, or sect. The LDS church has known this for years, and have gone to great lengths to make this information available. The Catholic church is apparently doing the opposite, and going to great lengths to make this information unaccesable to the people. What a shame. What a terrible move by the Catholic church. This is sure to upset more than just LDS folks.

Rob | 9:10 a.m. May 5, 2008

Pres. Hinckley used to say "Things will work out". I think that applies to this situation as well. We need not be judgmental of any group of people when the fact is they really don't understand what we're trying to do. If this is the work of the Lord, which I believe it to be, then things will work out. Let's be kind, be better examples today than we were yesterday, and see what happens.

Once more... | 9:17 a.m. May 5, 2008

One more try...there is NO religous issue at stake here. Mormons believe in baptizing the dead, no other church believes it has any significance. People can believe what they want to.

The ISSUE HERE is that many of these records will be lost forever, UNLESS an organization like the LDS church is allowed to do what it has been doing for many years...microfilm the records. These records will be lost or damaged unless it is done. For reasons peculiar to them, the LDS people have taken on this task...let them continue to do it. They turn no one away from their library or its immense store of records. Go to the SL gnealogical library on any day...you'll see MANY non-LDS people there. In fact, I think a slight majority of them are non-LDS (depending on the floor, and day). Be reasonable...there is NO issue here for anybody to be upset about, really. Religion is a matter of faith, not fact. We are all in the same boat in that regard. The peculiar belief of one group is no threat to anyone else. Microfilm these records, preserve them for future generations! I hope his Holiness sees the light on this.

Ownership- | 9:23 a.m. May 5, 2008

I agree we don't own our ancestors. It isn't a matter of ownership. It's simply a matter of finding out who our ancestors were and tying family lines together. It's interesting information. The LDS church has no more Ownership of it's members than the Catholic church does of it's members. Every soul that ever lived on this earth has their own free will.

Isn't it highly possible that sometime after the vital records were made hundreds of years ago(birth, baptism, marriage) that the person may have chosen for themselves to leave the Catholic church? There probably isn't any record made of that. So it doesn't make sense that the Catholics have "ownership" over a person just because their name was in the parish records. Perhaps if their death record is in the parish and they were known to go to that same church their whole adult lives, you could argue that they truely belonged to that church of their own free will. ANd they can certainly reject the proxy baptism if they want to. I would bet that many hundreds of thousands of people left church by the time they died.

tstu | 9:23 a.m. May 5, 2008

Why wouldn't the Vatican just ask the LDS church presidency instead?

James | 9:27 a.m. May 5, 2008

How does that work exactly...do I live with my kids as a family forever, or do I live with my parents as a family forever? Then what happens to my kids?
If people in heaven really have the choice to accept Mormonism or not (and the proxy baptism) does that mean there's free agengy in heaven? How does that work...how can Satan have influence in heaven? Plus, if God is standing over my shoulder telling me to accept a certain religion, what choice do I have in the hereafter? Why does a person need a physical baptism when all of us will receive a perfectly good body when Jesus comes again? Why can't we just do it then? God certainly knows who is good or not. If I were born in Mongolia in 400 A.D. and have no birth record, what happens then? Eternal damnation? If God sorts out everything in the end, why even bother with proxy basptism in the first place?

Oh, really? | 9:35 a.m. May 5, 2008

"YOU HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OVER YOUR ANCESTORS!"

But the Catholic Church does?

WOW!!!! | 9:39 a.m. May 5, 2008

I haven't read every comment on this blog, and I hope the Pope doesn't either. All the Catholic bashing isn't going to help change his or anyone elses opinion of the LDS church. In fact I have to wonder if all these negative comments aren't doing as much damage between the two churches as the Pope's decision to close the records.

Thomas | 9:42 a.m. May 5, 2008

I just want to say that, as a mormon, I could care less if some other church wants to perform proxy baptisms for my dead relatives... just as everyone has been saying... why would I care since I do not believe in the authority of those baptisms.

For those trying to 'turn the argument around' it doesn't really work as I believe the majority of the LDS would not react the way you seem to believe we would.

Catholic | 9:42 a.m. May 5, 2008

Parish records are the private property of the Catholic Church. They were never meant for geneaology nor as a data base for Mormons to harvest names en masse to disrespect our dead.

FAMILY NAMES | 9:56 a.m. May 5, 2008

No one wants to "harvest names en masse" or disrespect "your" dead - we're talking about people who have Catholic ancestors, who want to research their family members, being singled out and excluded because of their religious beliefs.

When I think of the millions of dollars and decades of time the LDS Church has spent in collecting and preserving genealogical records of every kind, only to turn around and share them FREE with the general public for whatever purpose they may dream up - seances, family reunions, curiosity about their ancestors - all I can think is, the Catholic Church must feel threatened. It's too bad because it doesn't do much for its image.

Sure, the church owns the books and can do what it likes about allowing some genealogists to see them and excluding others. But maybe the leaders should think more about this.

lifer | 9:58 a.m. May 5, 2008

The irony of Mormons getting upset over another church denying full access to non-members is simply delicious.

You REALLY don't get it | 10:07 a.m. May 5, 2008

I understand that you're laboring under the impression that you have the only true church and are doing a "loving" thing. But if the whole world is telling you that you're doing arrogant and insulting things to which they specifically object there may be a clue there that you're missing.

It's not that anyone thinks your "baptism" invalidates or supercedes anything or is anything more than superstition. It's that it insults the living and the dead in a particularly in-your-face way.

If you don't care about being arrogant, weird and irritating carry on. But there will be consequences so don't bother whining about them when you encounter them. Or when your missionaries have their jaws broken.

Marnie | 10:10 a.m. May 5, 2008

I am a Catholic who has done extensive genealogy research on my own family and assisted friends in their searches. I have asked permission to view records of many parishes (U.S., Canada, Ireland). Every one of those have asked me who I was looking for (how related) and basic details of the person to verify that my quest was personal and not professional. The Church is protecting against the use of personal information in registers for financial profit. Parishes also want to discourage people from browsing through frail registers; many pastors responded to my letters by providing helpful information they had looked up in the registers themselves, saving me time and travel expense, while ensuring that registers were disturbed as little as possible.

Pray for Pope | 10:21 a.m. May 5, 2008

Being the daughter of a Catholic convert I find this policy very disturbing. I have a RIGHT to claim my ancestors records. I have always respected the fact that I come from these other faithful pioneers- like Pres. Uchdorf spoke about.
I am even grateful that although I don't agree with infant baptism that they have done that for without it & the records kept I would have many missing children in my family lines. I hope that maybe we can all show our true Christian nature and pray that the Pope's heart may be softened and that the First Presidency may find a way to ease any concerns & get further permission to access these records.

re: wow | 10:26 a.m. May 5, 2008

you're right, even as a non-practicing Catholic, reading these comments makes me feel even more alienated by the LDS.

and lifer, you are right about irony. i see, the LDS church wants these records, wants the Catholic church information to remain open, yet and Catholic mother can't witness her converted daughter get married. that's some real family values there- alienate your non-LDS family- nice.

It's a commandment | 10:28 a.m. May 5, 2008

For all of you who think the LDS Church made this up on their own, you are sorely mistaken. It's a commandment from Christ and since it is a commandment, we are obliged to fulfill the commandment.

It's actually pretty simple....

Also, I'd like for a Catholic to explain to me how the worshiping of Mary does not violate the 1st of the 10 Commandments. I've always been puzzled about that one and haven't taken the time to ask a neighbor...

Mohan | 10:29 a.m. May 5, 2008

I never realized that our Catholic friends haven't appreciated the service we Mormons have been giving them and the rest of the world by photographing all their family records for the world to access. This doesn't make any sense. I think they are smart enough to figure out how they are hurting the world and recant this rediculous stranglehold on public access. May God bless the Catholic leadership to figure this out sooner than later.

Temple versus records | 10:33 a.m. May 5, 2008

Those who proffer on here that somehow allowing Catholics into the temple to see their child married is the same thing as looking at a record with information on it need a huge reality check.

I understand your dilemma. My in-laws are going to have to face that same situation in the coming years. I'm sure as the time draws closer that they will become more interested in the church doctrines and start to ask questions. Will they get baptized? Don't know. But they do know that they will not be allowed into the temple as it stands now.

While some parents might be selfish and complain about the decision of their child, it's nice to see mature parents accept the will of their child and support him/her.

Doctrines are there to be changed on a whim because some individual feels like they should be allowed into the temple. Life is full of choices and we don't get to pick and choose the consequences.

These 2 issues are not even close to the same thing. So please stop showing your ignorance and bitterness to something that will never change. You are the one who must change. Get on with it!

Mona | 10:35 a.m. May 5, 2008

The Catholic Church performed a great service to mankind by keeping Christianity alive through the centuries. They also took the responsibility of documenting people's lives centuries before municipalities began to do so. And it seems that if the Catholic Church now wants to restrict accessibility to those records, they are missing the purpose of the great work that was done by the priests of the past. How sad it would be if family researchers could no longer have access to the only (in many cases) evidence of their ancestor's lives.

Ownership | 10:37 a.m. May 5, 2008

The Catholic Church provided salvation to the people who were baptized into their Church. The Catholic Church kept records of those souls who became members of Christ through baptism by the authority of the Apostolic Succession that goes back to Peter and to Christ himself. Those souls belong to the "Church" (i.e., body) of Christ, along with the records. No Mormon has ANY right to defame those names or records by performing occult ceremonies in the false belief that it gives the deceased the "choice" to leave the Catholic faith in the hereafter. Even if those souls were your ancestors, that does not give you any claim on their souls or their records. But the Church does have claim on their souls and on their records.

Penny | 10:42 a.m. May 5, 2008

Thank you, Lord, for making all my lines Protestant and primarily Scotch-Irish.

Have folks never heard of "free will"? Do they not believe that those who've graduated from this life still have it? Do they not understand that baptism is about far more important things than denominational membership?

An LDS baptism was done for my oh-so-Southern-Baptist maternal grandmother. I don't have any problem with that. It was offered to her out of love and concern. If she was not inclined to accept it, I'm quite sure she was/is capable of saying, "No, thank you. I've already been baptized." Maybe a lot of Catholics don't think their ancestors are capable of saying, "No, thanks."

ajarizona | 10:51 a.m. May 5, 2008

My mother trained with the Nuns at Holy Cross. She is LDS. One day an new born baby was rushed to her by a Nun, they could not find a Priest to baptise this baby. With fear and trembling, the Nun asked my Mother, a non Catholic, to baptise this baby.

My mother went through the motions and the Nun was relieved as my Mother sprinkled some water on the baby, soon after, the baby died, and that Nun was at peace, for in her mind, that child would now, not go to hell.

My Mother felt no need to lecture her about the wrongfulness of infant baptism, which is her belief,
rather, she respected the Nuns religious viewpoint, and did what came instinctively to her.

Authority did not matter, in the Nuns mind, the baby would now be spared from eternity in hell.

Disagree with my Religion if you will, but don't tell me I cannot practice it.

ARROGANCE is, telling a Religion they must not do this or that, or we will do this, to STOP you.

My Catholic Ancestors belong to me, just as much, as the Pope feels they belong to him.

LiveAndLetLive!

LBR | 10:51 a.m. May 5, 2008

What I find interesting is that wen my brother was born in Holy Cross Hospital in Salt Lake City in 1961, he was baptized in the nursery by the nuns. We are not Catholic. Permission was not asked. I have no idea if this is still the practice at Catholic hospitals or a fluk of the time or of the hospital.

I also think The Deseret News editors should cut off comments after 100. The rantings get annoying. And who has time to read 400 comments?

re: temple vs. records | 11:00 a.m. May 5, 2008

i have no need for a reality check- my point is that there are rules that the LDS church wants respected, and people respect them (although i think it is awful to deny a parent the right to watch their children get married). when the tables turn, and the catholic church doesn't want their records open for posthumous baptisms, then that too must also be respected, no matter how much you want to howl about it.

Perhaps | 11:01 a.m. May 5, 2008

We do consider the needs. The non-member parents of those married in the temple can become members themselves, if they so choose. Then the point is moot. you sound bitter. That's OK. My non-member father not only understood, but RESPECTED the fact that we had chosen this path. He sat in the lobby of the temple, waiting for us to come back. Then, he of course, did all he could to make MY DAY more meaningful to ME.

If my child converted to Catholic, would I be totall included by the priest in the ceremony? Not.

Lets be neighborly about this | 11:01 a.m. May 5, 2008

From Luke 10:
"..what shall I do to attain eternal life?"
"..love the Lord thy God...and thy neighbor..."
"...who is my neighbor?"
"...a certain man...fell among thieves, which stripped him...wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead."
"...a certain priest...passed by on the other side."
"...a Levite...passed by on the other side."
"But a certain Samaritan...had compassion on him. And went to him and bound up his wounds...and took care of him."
"Go thou, and do likewise."

Anonymous | 11:00 a.m. May 5, 2008

I wonder how Mormons would feel if the Catholic church started baptizing by proxy all of you. Since you don't believe in it, would it bother you at all? Catholics believe in One baptism therefore we don't need any others. If you would claim the right to practice your religion as you see fit, you should give others the same right.

Temple V. records | 11:02 a.m. May 5, 2008

Support and accept what they have no control over are two very different things. It's not the "will of the child" to exclude parents from a wedding but church policy. Do you honestly believe one child wants his/her parents excluded? Sit with the other in-laws instead of seeing the wedding in commradory. I ask you now to accept that challenge.
My mother did not dress my sister, but a complete stranger. I know that my parents allowed the missionaries in their home until they found out they were not allowed to see their two daughters marry. The missionaries were never welcome in the home again and the church was referred to as a cult.
It is with the above in mind that many people SEE the LDS church and one of the many reasons why the Catholic church does not hand over records. Also of note, the LDS church is non-trinitarian and the Catholic Church is trinitarian.

bhparkman | 11:02 a.m. May 5, 2008

How much are the Catholic's asking for the records? Don't tell me they're just having religious differences over this - they want money or political advantage.

Besides the Saints have much, much better archivial and digitizing capabilities than the Catholic Church does. The records would be safer and better preserved in LDS hands.

Cool! | 11:03 a.m. May 5, 2008

I was born at Holy Cross Hospital, too. I wonder if I was baptized. No one ever told me. That would be fun to find out. I'm LDS by the way.

Records | 11:08 a.m. May 5, 2008

The LDS did not consider my Catholic mother good enough while alive to see her children marry in the temple, why is she good enough for them to care now that she is dead? I read someone wrote that "they should accept it." Well, I was the child that heard and saw the tears of my mother as my sister married. I am glad the Church isn't giving out records. I am sure that though my mother stated she didn't want any "mormon" work done on her, that it has been disobeyed and my sisters did the work anyway. I thought the religion was about the family, and I suppose it is...it's about tearing the family apart.

PCB | 11:08 a.m. May 5, 2008

It is just plain rude and arrogant to posthumously baptize the spirit or soul of a person that spent their life BY CHOICE as a Catholic or any other mainstream true christian religion believing in the holh trinity and the resurrection, into a religion that couldn't be further out in left field from those core fundamentals the person held dear. Are the LDS selective on who they baptize in this ceremony. Have they baptized say Hitler or Jack the ripper or even Tupac Shakur I wonder ?

Bob | 11:10 a.m. May 5, 2008

Amazing. Why would the LDS people care if other churches started baptizing their LDS dead? Their belief is that they have the proper priesthood authority and no one else does. Baptize away! It'll be interesting in the next life, won't it?

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.