Baptising children on a list of newborns

  • Thread starter Thread starter Secondname
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You don’t need to apologise Father. Thank you for clarifying. It was my ignorance of not being familiar with the mormom rituals which Jmcrae has explained very well.
Thanks all of you.
 
I know of a lady who works in a maternity hospital. As part of her job she gets the list of new borns the day after they are born. One of our mutual friend mentioned to her that she could baptise all the new born babies on the list by sprinkling holy water in the form of a cross on the on the piece of paper listing the new babies and saying the words that are normally said at Baptism i.e. “I baptise you … in the name of the Father…”

Do you think this is an acceptable and sensible practice? This lady in question feels she is doing the right thing and that God has given her this job for this purpose.
Sounds like she’s mormon.
Not at all. As a few others have already replied, I wasn’t speaking about *your *baptism being invalid. Mormons have a custom of “baptising” dead people and they use the geneology searches as a source for a list of names of dead people (in fact, they don’t just use the lists, they actually started and operate the lists). Those are the fake baptisms to which I referred.

Sorry if my comments caused any confusion.
The Mormons are the premier source for genological information. This is due to their collecting resources for “baptism of the dead”… a liturgy of the Mormon praxis where a youth is taken into the temple, rebaptized as proxy for the deceased, and entered into the Mormon baptismal registers.

They take it very seriously, and generally hold off on “Baptism of the dead” until they find a Mormon relative (even an Apostate Mormon will do). Which is why they are big on genealogy instead of just grabbing every name they can find.

Mormons also don’t baptize children under the age of reason, which they used to peg at age 8.

Their baptism practices are invalid, as a rule, due to violations of the canons of the first 3 Ecumenical councils; by those same council’s decisions, they do not even meet the standards to be called Christians.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top