[QUOTE=kunilou]
…FWIW Roman Catholics don’t even baptize adult converts if the person has a record that they’ve already been baptized in a Christian church. If there’s no record, a priest will perform what’s called a “conditional baptism” – the condition being “If you have not already been baptized.”
[/QUOTE]
Is baptism like heroin? Can you OD with too many hits?
The LDS has the right to do their post-mortem baptisms & the RCC has the right to play keep-away with their records to stymie the LDS efforts.
Oh yeah, and cut the baby in half so that each woman can have a part.
[QUOTE=kunilou]
FWIW Roman Catholics don’t even baptize adult converts if the person has a record that they’ve already been baptized in a Christian church. If there’s no record, a priest will perform what’s called a “conditional baptism” – the condition being “If you have not already been baptized.”
[/QUOTE]
Yes, from the Catholic point of view you’re either baptised or you’re not. If you are already baptised, it can’t be repeated. And you have to be alive to be baptised. Sacraments cannot be conferred on the dead.
Although I fully concur that the Catholic Church should not cooperate with the Mormon church on this, I think that they are wrong to publicly state this policy because in doing so it indirectly lends credence to the Mormans. They are basically saying, “We don’t believe what you are doing is going to change anything because we know our religion is right, but we STILL don’t want you doing it to OUR departed souls, so we aren’t going to help you to be able to do it. So nyia nyia nyia nyia, pppbbbbbttttttttt!!!”
From a metaphysical standpoint, what if they mistakenly baptize the deceased antichrist in death? They might open some loophole to sanctification and promulgate his hoary rise. Hell on earth, Heaven split asunder. There’s an endtimes book in there somewhere.
You all might like to read this interesting commentary, which sheds a bit of light on previous practices: Genealogists Need Catholic Records to Find Ancestors
For the record, if the Mormons want to baptize me in absentia I encourage them to do so. In fact, any sect that feels the urge to perform a ceremony that would make me eligible for their exceptionally unlikely version of the afterlife should go right ahead, so long as they don’t want any of my time or money. There’s some tiny (but non-zero) chance that one or more of these sects is on to something, so I’m happy to take the free equity.
[QUOTE=VarlosZ]
…so long as they don’t want any of my time or money. There’s some tiny (but non-zero) chance that one or more of these sects is on to something, so I’m happy to take the free equity.
[/QUOTE]
Pascal’s wager, but requiring none of your time or energy? Seems reasonable: there you are, sitting in the heavenly bleachers, and a divine messenger floats up to tell you that the LDS have invited you to a box seat. 
dangermom, nothing personal - you sound like an aunt that I love and respect, I swear - but some of us stood up for the practice of baptising the departed. Not because we believe in it, per se, but because it can’t possibly do any harm. (For my part, blessings are futile, I’m too far gone) I agree that the Catholic Church is being petty denying Mormon researchers access to records.
[QUOTE=VarlosZ]
There’s some tiny (but non-zero) chance that one or more of these sects is on to something, so I’m happy to take the free equity.
[/QUOTE]
As has been pointed out in the past, one flaw with that kind of reasoning is that there’s at least as much chance that the One True God will be the sort who’ll cast everyone into Hell if they ARE baptised by the Mormons. Or he’ll be like Terry Pratchett’s Gods, and he’ll do something nasty to you in the afterlife with a pointed stick for trying to be clever that in that “Pascal’s Wager” way.
“We’re going to show you what we think of Mr Clever Dick in these parts…”
I’m non religious but what the LDS are doing is useful for geneaologists and future historians IMO,I’ve heard of several people who have used their records to research their family tree.
As far as I’m concerned they 're quite welcome to baptise me,canonise me or declare me an instrument of the Devilafter I’m dead I’m not exactly going to know about it.
I don’t understand. Don’t you have to actually get wet to be baptized?
Oh yeah? Well I’m going to create an Athiest baptism, and I’m gonna baptize people before they’re born.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
As little fondness as I have for them, I’m on the Catholic Church’s side on this one. What the Mormons are doing would be a lot like me going to a graveyard, smashing crosses, and putting up “RIP Atheist” signs instead. Dishonest and obnoxious.
[/QUOTE]
If it’s necessary for people to be baptised as Mormon, which the LDS church believes, perhaps the Mormon church would be better off explaining why they’re doing it. I’m sure a lot of Catholics will feel that much better knowing that Mormons feel their deceased won’t make it to the highest levels of heaven and on the off chance the Mormon’s are right, they should hedge their bets.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
As has been pointed out in the past, one flaw with that kind of reasoning is that there’s at least as much chance that the One True God will be the sort who’ll cast everyone into Hell if they ARE baptised by the Mormons. Or he’ll be like Terry Pratchett’s Gods, and he’ll do something nasty to you in the afterlife with a pointed stick for trying to be clever that in that “Pascal’s Wager” way.
[/QUOTE]
Well, it seems to me that if God is so capricious and arbitrary as to punish people for something other people did, then we’re all up a creek anyway and it doesn’t matter what Mormons do or don’t do.
The LDS view is that everyone gets a chance to learn truth, whether in this life or the next. We agree with the Bible (and with Catholics) that a valid Christian baptism is essential to salvation–we differ on who has the authority to give such a baptism and on when that baptism can be done. The LDS view tends to be more expansive than the traditional one.
It’s my hope that there can be respectful discussion on both sides. LDS and Catholics have a long history of cooperation and friendly respect, while agreeing to mutually disagree on certain points of doctrine (if Mormons think that people won’t go to the highest levels of heaven without valid baptism, Catholics think that all unbaptized people–including Mormons–will never go to heaven at all). In many ways Catholics and Mormons have more in common than they do with Protestants. Mormons feel that a worldwide genealogy project that copies and preserves records, protecting the information from being lost to flood, fire, and decay, is a service that benefits all of humanity. While I can certainly understand Catholics’ feelings of outrage, I can also hope that a good conversation about what we actually do will help to assuage those feelings, which are often based on incorrect impressions.
[QUOTE=The Them]
dangermom, nothing personal - you sound like an aunt that I love and respect, I swear - but some of us stood up for the practice of baptising the departed. Not because we believe in it, per se, but because it can’t possibly do any harm. (For my part, blessings are futile, I’m too far gone) I agree that the Catholic Church is being petty denying Mormon researchers access to records.
[/QUOTE]
I’m sorry, Them, if I offended you, but I’m not sure how. Yes indeed, several people on this thread are coming down on the LDS side–I didn’t mean not to acknowledge that. 
By posting to this thread you have all agreed to be baptized into the First Church of Really Not All That Bright of Right Now Saints.
I expect to receive a PM from each of you containing your full name and date of birth by the end of the business day.
You can also send a money order for $121.00 to cover the cost of your baptism; otherwise, we’ll be happy to bill you.
[QUOTE=dangermom]
Well, it seems to me that if God is so capricious and arbitrary as to punish people for something other people did, then we’re all up a creek anyway and it doesn’t matter what Mormons do or don’t do.
The LDS view is that everyone gets a chance to learn truth, whether in this life or the next. We agree with the Bible (and with Catholics) that a valid Christian baptism is essential to salvation–we differ on who has the authority to give such a baptism and on when that baptism can be done. The LDS view tends to be more expansive than the traditional one.
It’s my hope that there can be respectful discussion on both sides. LDS and Catholics have a long history of cooperation and friendly respect, while agreeing to mutually disagree on certain points of doctrine (if Mormons think that people won’t go to the highest levels of heaven without valid baptism, Catholics think that all unbaptized people–including Mormons–will never go to heaven at all). In many ways Catholics and Mormons have more in common than they do with Protestants. Mormons feel that a worldwide genealogy project that copies and preserves records, protecting the information from being lost to flood, fire, and decay, is a service that benefits all of humanity. While I can certainly understand Catholics’ feelings of outrage, I can also hope that a good conversation about what we actually do will help to assuage those feelings, which are often based on incorrect impressions.
[/QUOTE]
So, I just want to be sure that I understand what you are saying here. Does the LDS church consider other Christian churches such as the Roman Catholic Church to have valid baptisms? If so, what is the definition of “valid?” With the Catholic Church, the baptism is either valid or it isn’t, and this concept that it can be an “almost as good” baptism seems very odd to me.
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
So, I just want to be sure that I understand what you are saying here. Does the LDS church consider other Christian churches such as the Roman Catholic Church to have valid baptisms? If so, what is the definition of “valid?” With the Catholic Church, the baptism is either valid or it isn’t, and this concept that it can be an “almost as good” baptism seems very odd to me.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe we have a little misunderstanding here; I’m not sure what you mean by “almost as good.”
Both LDS and Catholics agree on a basic premise of the necessity of apostolic succession and priesthood authority. Catholics claim to have priesthood authority directly from God, in an unbroken chain that goes back through St. Peter to Christ himself. Thus they believe that their baptisms are valid–that is, they confer an actual spiritual benefit, cleansing the person from sin and making him reborn as a Christian, opening the way to salvation. The RCC has also softened its stance on baptism and now considers Protestant baptisms done in the proper spirit to be acceptable to God, even though they do not believe Protestants to have actual priesthood authority.
Latter-day Saints also claim to have priesthood authority directly from God, in an unbroken chain that goes back through St. Peter to Christ himself. (Same principle–we disagree on who has it, not whether it is necessary. Protestants reject the principle entirely and claim the priesthood of all believers.) We believe that the chain of apostolic succession was broken not long after the deaths of the New Testament apostles, and that priesthood authority had to be restored if it was to exist again on the earth. Thus the LDS Church is not Protestant–we didn’t want to reform existing Christian practice–it is Restorationist, because we wanted to restore something that was lost.
So the LDS believe that their baptisms are valid Christian baptisms conferring an actual spiritual benefit (cleansing the person from sin and making him reborn as a Christian, opening the way to salvation), and that all other baptisms are not valid. So we don’t accept baptism from any other church–anyone joining the LDS Church has to be baptized. And likewise, no other Christian church that I know of considers an LDS baptism to be valid (including the RCC). If I wanted to become Catholic or Orthodox or something, I would have to be baptized. That’s fair.
Now, the Bible says that anyone who believes and is baptized is saved, while anyone who does not believe is damned. Baptism appears to be an absolutely necessary ordinance if you want to go to heaven–if you believe, then you’ll be baptized. There doesn’t seem to be the option of believing and not getting baptized and still being saved. This has presented a problem for centuries–what about all those innocent people who lived their lives without ever hearing of Jesus Christ? What about unbaptized babies who die? What if you got baptized in good faith but it was not a valid baptism from someone with the priesthood?
For a long time, Christians simply believed that anyone who wasn’t baptized was damned, and even innocent babies could only get as far as Limbo. That seems unnecessarily cruel to modern people, who usually decide to ignore the clear teaching in the Bible and believe that God will save all good people, or something similar, for after all he is a loving God and how can it be loving to damn someone who never had a chance?
Mormons, however, have another way to deal with this problem. In 1 Cor. 15:29, Paul makes a rather mysterious comment: “Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?” He’s referring to some practice that was lost or something–no one knew what to do with this passage. Clearly the Corinthians were doing baptisms for the dead, and he didn’t disapprove, but no one knew anything more, so the verse is usually ignored as being too obscure to understand.
The LDS Church restored this practice. We believe that everyone who ever lived will have the chance to learn and accept or reject the truth that Christ is the Savior. Since everyone who believes needs to be baptized, and baptism is an ordinance that can only be done with a living body, we do it by proxy for our ancestors, in order to link ourselves with them in a family chain going back as far as we can find. So: unbaptized babies, people who lived and never heard of Christ, all those people–they are not lost but have a chance to learn just as we do. They may then accept or reject the proxy baptism as they choose.
This is why Mormons are so obsessed with genealogy and why we think it’s so important to copy and preserve records–we want to do this work for our ancestors. It’s against the rules to do it for anyone else–each person is supposed to be researching her own line of descent. We think it’s so important that we have set up family history libraries in most cities, and anyone at all is welcome to come in and do their own family history research for no charge and with plenty of help–so that anyone can be connected with their own heritage.
Well, that got long, sorry. But I hope it clears up the question!