Comments about ‘Catholics told not to give LDS parish data’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, May 4 2008 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended

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.

non-mormon here

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.


"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.

David P

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.


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?

RE: bj

um hmmm

Not a Catholic

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.


The mormons just can't keep their nose out of other people's business, even after they are dead.


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.


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...

Susan G

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.

To: Marie

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

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?

aj arizona

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.

aj arizona

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.

Chris Plummer

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.

Dead aren't really dead

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.



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.


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!


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.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments