Papal opinions of Mormonism?

[Scott Lloyd]

19 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I would be interested, too. A quick google search only yielded the declaration that Mormon baptisms are invalid and that parishes should not give records to Mormon genealogical societies.

Out of curiosity, what is surprising about it to you? The reasoning made sense to me: the form doesn't work because of the LDS theology of God.

If our church doesn't recognize a Catholic baptism, we can hardly expect the Catholic Church to recognize a Mormon baptism.

Edited to add: 

I hesitate to add to this post as MiserereNobis has already repped me for it, but I see two separate issues here. 

The first I've already said doesn't concern me. There's no reason Catholics should feel obliged to recognize a Mormon baptism in the Catholic faith. This is a non-issue. 

The second issue pertains to the Catholic Church refusing to provide Mormon entities access to genealogy records. This arguably is hindering human progress as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is far-and-away the premiere repository of family history records in all the world and makes that online repository accessible to all free of charge. 

If there is a worry over proxy baptisms of deceased persons it is groundless. If Mormon baptism holds no validity anyway, then no harm is done. And even so, Mormon belief holds that the vicarious ordinance is not valid unless it is accepted by the spirit of the deceased person. 

So withholding access to records of the deceased strikes me as petty at best and obstructionist to universal interests at worst. 

Edited July 17, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Danzo]

17 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I would be interested, too. A quick google search only yielded the declaration that Mormon baptisms are invalid and that parishes should not give records to Mormon genealogical societies.

Out of curiosity, what is surprising about it to you? The reasoning made sense to me: the form doesn't work because of the LDS theology of God.

Interestingly enough, I was taught when I was an EMT that I could perform catholic baptisms for newborns that were dying and the catholic church would find them valid.  I don't know if that was true or not or if that was something they taught us that was incorrect.  Anyone heard this?

 

ETA:  I found that my question was answered above.  I guess a Mormon can baptize a catholic, but a mormon would need to be rebaptised to become a catholic.

I'm fine with it.  Their church, their rules.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Danzo

[Darren10]

7 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

The pronouncement came because of specific questions asked by American bishops. So, yes, while the awareness had been there for a long time, it wasn't until it became an issue that needed answering that the decision was made.

 

While I don't have a specific answer for this, I would guess that his errors were not large enough to make the form invalid. The rule is that there is a presumption of validity unless the Church has ruled otherwise. So, prior to the the pronouncement that LDS baptisms are invalid, the presumption would have been that they are. However, from what I've read (admittedly limited), most priests and bishops would baptism converts from the LDS church anyways, just to be on the safe side

 

It's difficult to asses his errs since , from my understanding, all his written works were burned. But, as I understand it, he denied that Jesus Christ was Divine. That's a big error is you ask me. 

The LDS baptismal prayer is virtually identical to the Catholic baptismal prayer. Both churches baptise in the nsme of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ("Holy Ghost" in the English version of the LDS baptismal prayer). It is the LDS rejection of Holy Trinity and the belief in a Heavenly Mother and that she had a role in the creation, which were the primary reasons the Catholic Church reject LDS baptisms. This is amazing to me for two reasons. A) there is no biblical obligation for anyone to believe in Holy Trinity, particularly to be baptized. Only to believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which the LDS fully do. B) While there is a belief in a Heavenly Mother and that she was involved in the creation, her exact role and status is not known. It is taught thst she was involved in creating our spirits in the premortal world ("creating" meaning "formed" or "shaped" not to "create out of nothing"), but beyond this, nothing is really known about her. She is NEVER taught in the creation of heaven and earth and "all things" so far as I am aware. Also, the veneration of Mary is so potent in Catholic theology that, it seems to me in some ways, she is honored more so than Jesus Christ. I know officially this is not the case but Catholic believers focus so heavily on her that she is spoken of more frequently and revered as a loving and compassionate person whereas her Son is a bloody beaten up near corpse of a person. I speak of Catholic orthopraxy, not orthodoxy per se, but it is so frequent that I wonder what's the beef in the LDS beliefe in a Heavenly Mother who exists somehow and someway? 

[Darren10]

4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

If our church doesn't recognize a Catholic baptism, we can hardly expect the Catholic Church to recognize a Mormon baptism.

Edited to add: 

I hesitate to add to this post as MiserereNobis has already repped me for it, but I see two separate issues here. 

The first I've already said doesn't concern me. There's no reason Catholics should feel obliged to recognize a Mormon baptism in the Catholic faith. This is a non-issue. 

The second issue pertains to the Catholic Church refusing to provide Mormon entities access to genealogy records. This arguably is hindering human progress as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is far-and-away the premiere repository of family history records in all the world and makes that online repository accessible to all free of charge. 

If there is a worry over proxy baptisms of deceased persons it is groundless. If Mormon baptism holds no validity anyway, then no harm is done. And even so, Mormon belief holds that the vicarious ordinance is not valid unless it is accepted by the spirit of the deceased person. 

So withholding access to records of the deceased strikes me as petty at best and obstructionist to universal interests at worst. 

I completely agree that the Catholic Church does not have to recognize Mormon baptisms but the logic behind their rejection baffles me. Not mentioned in my previous post explaining my confusion is unless the Catholic Church comes right out and declares the LDS Church as a non-Christian church, their rejection of LDS baptism as non Christian for rejecting the non biblical belief in Holy Trinity completely contradicts itself. How can a church be Christian but their baptisms, which fully follow biblical teachings of baptisms, not be Christian? 

[Darren10]

4 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

I'm fine with them not accepting our baptism. It is the claim we are not Christian that is problematic.

That's what confuses me. I do not recall the Catholic Church declaring that Mormons are not Christian or that mormonism is not christiam. Only Mormon baptisms are not Christian. That is a very strange position to take. 

So, if my understanding is accurate, than I'll just say that when a church isolates another church for criticism, it is the church being critical who usually looks foolish or at least a bit foolish. 

[Scott Lloyd]

37 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I completely agree that the Catholic Church does not have to recognize Mormon baptisms but the logic behind their rejection baffles me. Not mentioned in my previous post explaining my confusion is unless the Catholic Church comes right out and declares the LDS Church as a non-Christian church, their rejection of LDS baptism as non Christian for rejecting the non biblical belief in Holy Trinity completely contradicts itself. How can a church be Christian but their baptisms, which fully follow biblical teachings of baptisms, not be Christian? 

We take a comparable position when we acknowledge their Christianity but don't recognize their baptism as valid or efficacious.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[MiserereNobis]

53 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

A) there is no biblical obligation for anyone to believe in Holy Trinity, particularly to be baptized. Only to believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, which the LDS fully do

The Catholic Church is not sola scriptura, so the Bible is not the final say on anything. Your argument here works for protestants, but not for Catholics. The Bible, Holy Tradition, and the Magisterium are the three legs of the Catholic Church. Tradition and the Magisterium have decreed belief in the Trinity to be necessary for a valid form of baptism.

 

56 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I wonder what's the beef in the LDS beliefe in a Heavenly Mother who exists somehow and someway?

The idea, as far as I understand it, behind a belief in Heavenly Mother is intricately wrapped in the LDS view of God (having been human, exalted, etc). The problems with a Heavenly Mother therefore are similar to the problems with the LDS view of God, which are incompatible with Catholic views of God.

You are right that there is an incredible veneration of the Blessed Virgin. I adore her greatly.

[MiserereNobis]

43 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

So, if my understanding is accurate, than I'll just say that when a church isolates another church for criticism, it is the church being critical who usually looks foolish or at least a bit foolish.

Shall we rehash the "Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon and the church of the devil" threads?

 

[Darren10]

17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

We take a comparable position when we acknowledge their Christianity but don't recognize their baptism as valid or efficacious.

Not really. Our baptism has much more to do with authority than in believing in the proper concept of the Godhead. You can be a full-fledged believing Trinitarian and still be baptized in the LDS Church. 

[Darren10]

Just now, MiserereNobis said:

Shall we rehash the "Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon and the church of the devil" threads?

 

Sure. 

[MiserereNobis]

24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

We take a comparable position when we acknowledge their Christianity but don't recognize their baptism as valid or efficacious.

I was going to say this -- thanks. I assume most LDS would consider me Christian, even though I do not have a valid Christian baptism according to LDS. That's how I view Mormons -- Christian but without a valid Christian baptism.

Of course, there are many Catholics who would take the next step and say Mormons are not Christian. I am not one of them.

Edited July 17, 2017 by MiserereNobis

[MiserereNobis]

2 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

You can be a full-fledged believing Trinitarian and still be baptized in the LDS Church. 

Is this true? Someone can deny the LDS doctrine of God and still become LDS?

[MiserereNobis]

4 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Not really. Our baptism has much more to do with authority than in believing in the proper concept of the Godhead. 

Authority is on your list of what is required for a valid baptism. It is not on our list.

Proper belief in the Trinity and the intention to cleanse original sin and join the Body of Christ is on our list. It is not on yours.

It's all about what's on the required lists for validity. Our Churches differ on the details, but not on the fact that some things must be present in order for a sacrament/ordinance to be valid.

[MiserereNobis]

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The second issue pertains to the Catholic Church refusing to provide Mormon entities access to genealogy records. This arguably is hindering human progress as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is far-and-away the premiere repository of family history records in all the world and makes that online repository accessible to all free of charge. 

If there is a worry over proxy baptisms of deceased persons it is groundless. If Mormon baptism holds no validity anyway, then no harm is done. And even so, Mormon belief holds that the vicarious ordinance is not valid unless it is accepted by the spirit of the deceased person. 

So withholding access to records of the deceased strikes me as petty at best and obstructionist to universal interests at worst. 

I do agree with you here in that I don't see the issue with allowing people access to parish records. I wouldn't go so far as to call it petty or obstructionist. I think it is just a misunderstanding of things and a knee-jerk reaction.

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Shall we rehash the "Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon and the church of the devil" threads?

 

Please, no!

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I do agree with you here in that I don't see the issue with allowing people access to parish records. I wouldn't go so far as to call it petty or obstructionist. I think it is just a misunderstanding of things and a knee-jerk reaction.

Maybe my language was unduly harsh. Then again, most knee-jerk reactions end up being petty in the final analysis.

 

[Darren10]

11 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

The Catholic Church is not sola scriptura, so the Bible is not the final say on anything. Your argument here works for protestants, but not for Catholics. The Bible, Holy Tradition, and the Magisterium are the three legs of the Catholic Church. Tradition and the Magisterium have decreed belief in the Trinity to be necessary for a valid form of baptism.

 

The idea, as far as I understand it, behind a belief in Heavenly Mother is intricately wrapped in the LDS view of God (having been human, exalted, etc). The problems with a Heavenly Mother therefore are similar to the problems with the LDS view of God, which are incompatible with Catholic views of God.

You are right that there is an incredible veneration of the Blessed Virgin. I adore her greatly.

While I know Catholics are not sola scriptura, I do need clarification. Do not Catholics believe the Bible as the only and final source of *divine revelation*, particularly for the Church? So, if the Bible makes no obligation as to believing in Holy Trinity, why are any Christian denominations' baptism invalidated for not believing in Holy Trinity? So what authority does the Magisterium claim upon to declare that one must believe in Holy Trinity. Catholics I have spoken to tell me that Holy Trinity and biblical teachings are the same since belief in Holy Trinity comes from bilbical teachings. Is that how younwould construct it? 

God *the Father* "having been human" is nowhere taught in any LDS canon. I have told doubting Mormons here on this website many times to focus on scripture in order to learn and understand "what Mormons believe". This is especially true when one ,ust understand what the LDS Church believes and teaches authoritatively as a chuch. 

Bringing up this concern again seems that Logic fails the Catholic argument. Clearly the Catholic Church teaches that God the Son was born as a mortal man. But if in addition to that they believe that while the Father and the Son are two separate and distinct persons, they believe they are one being. Does that not put Christ's mortal birth closer to believing that "God was once a mortal man" than the LDS view which declares the Father and the Son as both separate and distinct persons and beings? There is no doctrine anywhere beyond suggestions for addtional personal study that God the Fathrr was once a mortal man.  I still fail to see why there is a concern of believing in the existence of a Heavenly Mother as wrong whereas Mary is adored, prayed to, and is seen as essential to bring saved in that she will uniqiely lead you to the Son. 

What revelation of Heavenly Mother do you take exception with? 

[Darren10]

12 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I was going to say this -- thanks. I assume most LDS would consider me Christian, even though I do not have a valid Christian baptism according to LDS. That's how I view Mormons -- Christian but without a valid Christian baptism.

Of course, there are many Catholics who would take the next step and say Mormons are not Christian. I am not one of them.

The Catholic Church's rejection of Mormon baptism as Christian is based heavily on the view that they have an incorrect view of God. How can Mormons then be Christian as a church? Do we have an incorrect view of Jesus but we're still Christians? I do not speak about individual Catholics but as a church. 

[Darren10]

14 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Is this true? Someone can deny the LDS doctrine of God and still become LDS?

As long as they believe in Jesus Christ, yes. I have known people baptized believing in Holy Trinity. That can create friction along the lines as they'll no doubt be confronted in church via being taught what the LDS Church pfficially believes regarding the Godhead, but, yes, there is no prohibition whatsoever in baptizing believing trinitarians. 

[Darren10]

15 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Authority is on your list of what is required for a valid baptism. It is not on our list.

Proper belief in the Trinity and the intention to cleanse original sin and join the Body of Christ is on our list. It is not on yours.

It's all about what's on the required lists for validity. Our Churches differ on the details, but not on the fact that some things must be present in order for a sacrament/ordinance to be valid.

"Authority is on your list of what is required for a valid baptism. It is not on our list."

Correct, and that's what I said. 

"Proper belief in the Trinity and the intention to cleanse original sin and join the Body of Christ is on our list. It is not on yours."

Correct. That's what I said. So, how come Arius and all his followers (a huge chinck of the early Christian population) is considered baptized? Did the Catholic Church not consider this an issue to answer until a decade or so ago? 

I've no problem with two churches having two different standards but you are the one who came to the thread and aksed why CDO3 was confused by the Catholic Church's position to reject LDS baptisms. 

[MiserereNobis]

15 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Do not Catholics believe the Bible as the only and final source of *divine revelation*, particularly for the Church?

No. The Bible is one of the three legs. There are Catholic dogmas that are not found in the Bible because they are found in Tradition and decreed by the Magisterium.

16 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

So what authority does the Magisterium claim upon to declare that one must believe in Holy Trinity.

The authority that Christ gave to the Apostles that were then passed on to the Bishops, with the Bishop of Rome, as Peter's successor, having primacy.

17 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Catholics I have spoken to tell me that Holy Trinity and biblical teachings are the same since belief in Holy Trinity comes from bilbical teachings. Is that how younwould construct it? 

I would say that the roots of the Trinity are found in the Bible and that the doctrine of the Trinity does not contradict the Bible. I know we are not going to agree on this and I don't want to turn this into a Trinity thread. The clarifications on the doctrine of the Trinity all come from Tradition and the Magisterium (which is why it strikes me as humorous when protestants deny the Catholic Church's authority yet believe in the doctrines promulgated by that authority).

21 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

God *the Father* "having been human" is nowhere taught in any LDS canon

I'd be curious as to what other Mormons here have to say about this.

21 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

What revelation of Heavenly Mother do you take exception with?

I have a feeling that your beliefs do not represent standard LDS beliefs. Is this correct?

[cdowis]

35 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I was going to say this -- thanks. I assume most LDS would consider me Christian, even though I do not have a valid Christian baptism according to LDS. That's how I view Mormons -- Christian but without a valid Christian baptism.

In LDS doctrine, you can go to heaven (terrestrial kingdom) without baptism.

[MiserereNobis]

How about everyone interested in this read the official explanation from the Vatican.

[MiserereNobis]

Here are some highlights relevant to the discussion thus far:

Quote

Precisely because of the necessity of Baptism for salvation the Catholic Church has had the tendency of broadly recognizing this right intention in the conferring of this sacrament, even in the case of a false understanding of Trinitarian faith, as for example in the case of the Arians.

Quote

In the 20th century, the Catholic Church became more aware of the Trinitarian errors which the teaching proposed by Smith contained, though he used the traditional terms, and therefore more and more doubts spread about the validity of the Baptism conferred by the Mormons, in spite of the fact that the form, as far as the substance of the terminology goes, coincided with that used by the Church. As a result, almost imperceptibly there developed difference of practice, insofar as those who had a certain personal knowledge of the teaching of the Mormons considered their Baptism invalid, while the common practice continued of applying the traditional principle of the presumption in favour of the validity of such Baptism, since there was no official norm in this regard. In recent years, as a result of a request from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Bishops' Conference of the United States undertook a detailed study of this delicate issue with the hope of coming to a definitive conclusion. On its part the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith undertook a new examination of the material that came from the United States and thus was able to resolve the proposed question.

Quote

As is easily seen, to the similarity of titles there does not correspond in any way a doctrinal content which can lead to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The words Father, Son and Holy Spirit, have for the Mormons a meaning totally different from the Christian meaning. The differences are so great that one cannot even consider that this doctrine is a heresy which emerged out of a false understanding of the Christian doctrine. The teaching of the Mormons has a completely different matrix. We do not find ourselves, therefore, before the case of the validity of Baptism administered by heretics, affirmed already from the first Christian centuries, nor of Baptism conferred in non-Catholic ecclesial communities, as noted in Canon 869 §2.

Quote

Summing up, we can say: The Baptism of the Catholic Church and that of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints differ essentially, both for what concerns faith in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in whose name Baptism is conferred, and for what concerns the relationship to Christ who instituted it. As a result of all this, it is understood that the Catholic Church has to consider invalid, that is to say, cannot consider true Baptism, the rite given that name by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

It is equally necessary to underline that the decision of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is a response to a particular question regarding the Baptism of Mormons and obviously does not indicate a judgment on those who are members of the Church of JesusChrist of Latter-day Saints. Furthermore, Catholics and Mormons often find themselves working together on a range of problems regarding the common good of the entire human race. It can be hoped therefore that through further studies, dialogue and good will, there can be progress in reciprocal understanding and mutual respect.

 

[Darren10]

21 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

No. The Bible is one of the three legs. There are Catholic dogmas that are not found in the Bible because they are found in Tradition and decreed by the Magisterium.

The authority that Christ gave to the Apostles that were then passed on to the Bishops, with the Bishop of Rome, as Peter's successor, having primacy.

I would say that the roots of the Trinity are found in the Bible and that the doctrine of the Trinity does not contradict the Bible. I know we are not going to agree on this and I don't want to turn this into a Trinity thread. The clarifications on the doctrine of the Trinity all come from Tradition and the Magisterium (which is why it strikes me as humorous when protestants deny the Catholic Church's authority yet believe in the doctrines promulgated by that authority).

I'd be curious as to what other Mormons here have to say about this.

I have a feeling that your beliefs do not represent standard LDS beliefs. Is this correct?

Not that I emphasized "divine revekation". I know traditions are a source of authority but was there any revelation given to the. Magisterium to reject non trinitarian baptisms? If not then why does not the Bible, the alnowledged only source of divine revelation not obligate anyone to believe in Holy Trinity as a qualification for baptism? Mormons believe in and practice everything the Bible teaches regarding baptism so how does the Magisterium get thst divine knowledge? You have outlined what I have heard before from believing and practicing Catholics regarding Holy Trinity and the Bible. I disagree with your belief in connecting Holy Trinity with the Bible but I too want to stick to the topic on hand. I do not get why LDS baptisms are rejected for rhem being non trinitarian but fully biblical whereas Arius and the entire Arium sect of thr Catholic Church are considered fully baptized when they were neither trinitarian nor biblical in their rejection of Jesus being Divine. It's very confusing to me. 

Heavenly Mother: To my knowkedge I have very accurately represented what the LDS Church believes regarding her. Why this is contraversisl to the Catholic Church but Mary's [extrememly] high theological veneration is not also confuses me. 

Heaven Father as a mortal man: I believe there's truth to thst as it makes much sense to me but I place absolutely no faith in it nor dies the LDS Church. Beyond speculation, I do not teach it and I do nit recall anytime the LDS Church has taught it for its members to believe. The closest you'll get is suggestions in LDS cirriculum, as a footnote, to read snd study Joseph Smith's King Follett's Discourse. Again, doesn't the Catholic Church teach more so that God was a mortal man since as a church they declare the Father and the Son as obe Being whereas the LDS teach they are teo separate and distinct beings? 

The rejection confuses me in logical terms I guess mainly because it seems very inconsistant.

EDITED TO AD: I am glad you made that link, I too was going to do that. I need to go right now so will read and respond later. God bless you my Catholic brother. You're a good man I've no doubt.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Darren10