Question for Mormons: Explain your practice of 'sealing' the departed?

[RebeccaJ]

That is truly unfortunate and, if done on purpose (unlikely), greatly condemned and, if done accidentally (likely), on account of shoddy ancestral research, most unfortunate. Latter-day Saints are taught to research their kindred dead and obviously someone must have had an ancestor with a similar name and researched the wrong birth record.

Jozef De Veuster was born in the village of Tremelo in Flemish Brabant in 1840. There easily could have been one or two or even numerous others named Jozef who were born to parents with that surname in that time period in that locale. Obviously, whoever performed the research did not have sufficient information to discern that the person researched had never married and could not be an ancestor of the researcher. Truly unfortunate for all involved.

Ummm, who is the fictional wife named Marie? There is no marriage record anywhere for St. Damien. (incidentally, this is why I don’t trust the info at ancestry.com, people just make stuff up.)

I can appreciate your POV, giving the benefit of the doubt, but LDS have a track record of baptizing famous dead Catholics. St. Francis has been “baptized” by Mormons 10 times.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Ummm, who is the fictional wife named Marie? There is no marriage record anywhere for St. Damien. (incidentally, this is why I don’t trust the info at ancestry.com, people just make stuff up.)

I can appreciate your POV, giving the benefit of the doubt, but LDS have a track record of baptizing famous dead Catholics. St. Francis has been “baptized” by Mormons 10 times.

From Reuters we have more fictional wives.

Pope Pius XII was baptized three times and also “sealed” in eternal marriage to a fictional Mrs Eugenio Pacelli. Saint Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order of priests, was also “sealed” to a bogus wife. Catholic clergy do not marry.

You’d think they’d take a little more care about their sacred ordinances, after all they are supposedly doing work that God will be looking at at some point do they really want to have to explain why they did such a sloppy job or made stuff up? It strikes me that members who do this are being far more disrespectful of their ordinances than Bill Maher could ever be with his “Un-baptism”.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

I can appreciate your POV, giving the benefit of the doubt, but LDS have a track record of baptizing famous dead Catholics. St. Francis has been “baptized” by Mormons 10 times.

I’m not trying to be a jerk with this, but I just want to give a little perspective about exactly how big of a benefit Steven is giving his fellow members of the LDS faith. Let’s just look at the numbers: According to BYU’s most recent statistics (2005) there are 6,267 Mormons in Belgium, out of a general population of more than 10,000,000 people. That’s less than 1% of the population.

globalmormonism.byu.edu/?page_id=127

Furthermore, according to wikipedia, in 2006 the village of Tremelo had a population of just over 13,000 people. (It also notes that the village is “most famous for” being the hometown Father Damien, a recently canonized saint.) I’m not sure what the population of Tremelo was in the mid-1800’s, but I’m guessing it was less than 13,000. Let’s say it had maybe 10,000 people.

So, let’s list exactly what needs to be true, in order to accept the notion that the posthumous baptism and “sealing” of Father Damien was an “honest mistake” on the part of a descendant of some other “Jozef De Veuster” from Tremelo.

1. There was “one” or “two” or “even numerous” (numerous!) other Jozef De Veusters, who were born to parents of the same surname in a village of less than 10,000 people in the mid-1800’s.
2. One of the “numerous” other Jozef De Veusters had a living descendant who was among the less than 1% of the general population of Belgium who are members of the LDS faith. That descendant, living in 2000, accidentally had the wrong ancestor baptized and sealed. This descendant, erroneously and without any malice, “did not have sufficient information” that the person he was baptizing was one of the most famous Belgians in modern history.

OR…

1. One of the “numerous” other Jozef De Veusters born in a small village in rural Belgium in the mid-1800’s had a descendant that either made it to, or was born in the United States. This descendant just happened to convert to the LDS faith. This descendant then took it upon himself (or herself) to posthumously baptize his (or her) ancestors. Through no fault of his (or her) own, this descendant erroneously baptized one of the most famous Belgians in modern history. This living descendant of one of the “numerous” other Jozef De Veusters “did not have sufficient information to discern” (your words, that’s an exact quote) that the person he was baptizing was not, in fact, one of the “numerous” Jozef De Veusters born into a small, rural Belgian village who never went on to do anything of note, but actually one of the most famous Belgians in modern history and without question the single most famous person to ever be born in Tremelo. Your scenario is basically the equivalent of saying, “Whoops, I mean to posthumously baptize the other Abraham Lincoln who was born in Hodgenville, KY in 1809. Or, you know, one of the ‘numerous’ other Abraham Lincolns who were born in that village at that time.”

Now… you’re obviously a smart guy, Steven. So I’ll just ask you one, simple question:

Really?

 

[twopekinguys]

Let’s not forget all of the Jewish Holocaust victims that were “mistakenly” baptized after death too.

It is hard to believe that any of this is accidental, or is true geneological research in any way considering the names are submitted in bulk.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I’m thinking more likely they used Catholic parish records. My parents did this for many years, hours and hours of entering Catholic parish records into a Mormn database. Mormons like to claim to non-Mormons that these records were not used for their temple work, but that is not what my parents told me, more than once. They KNEW the information they were entering was headed for their temples.

Still doesn’t account for the fictional wife. I can only guess it is cultural, or psychological…seeing the name of an adult who never married…couldn’t possibly be so to a Mormon way of thinking. So, give them a wife with a common name, a proxy name for the wife that must have existed.

Anyway, I’m glad the Church has put an end to giving Catholic parish records to Mormons.

 

[Crdl2Grv]

Let’s not forget all of the Jewish Holocaust victims that were “mistakenly” baptized after death too.

Again, totally accidental. Each and every submission. Just the same separate and completely unrelated honest mistake happening over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again…

 

[Crdl2Grv]

My parents did this for many years, hours and hours of entering Catholic parish records into a Mormn database.

Huh. Pretty weird that your parents would make the same completely honest and totally innocent mistake over and over again for “hours and hours” and “for many years.” The only plausible explanation is that “obviously” your parents “did not have sufficient information to discern” that the people they were entering into the database - for hours and hours and for years and years - were not actually related to them.

 

[pablope]

And how unfortunate that the mistake to baptize Pope John Paul II occurred six times!

FYI…catholic.com/tracts/mormonisms-baptism-for-the-dead

The case against baptism for the dead is also made by the Mormon scriptures themselves. The current Mormon doctrine on baptism for the dead is quite unlike what Joseph Smith first taught. As in other cases, the Book of Mormon becomes an important tool for the Christian apologist. It contradicts much Mormon theology, and baptism for the dead is no exception.

In Alma 34:35-36 we read: “For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he does seal you his. Therefore, the spirit of the Lord has withdrawn from you and hath no place in you; the power of the devil is over you, and this is the final state of the wicked.”

In other words, those who die as non-Mormons go to hell, period. There’s no suggestion of a later, vicarious admission into the Mormon church.

We also see present-day Mormon doctrine contradicted in 2 Nephi 9:15: “And it shall come to pass that when all men shall have passed from this first death unto life, insomuch as they have become immortal, they must appear before the judgment seat of the Holy One of Israel, and then cometh the judgment and then must they be judged according to the holy judgment of God. For the Lord God hath spoken it, and it is his eternal word, which cannot pass away, that they who are righteous shall be righteous still, and they who are filthy shall be filthy still; wherefore, they who are filthy . . . shall go away into everlasting fire, prepared for them; and their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end.”

It is unforunate that Smith abandoned his own, earlier doctrine. It would not have made the Mormon scriptures any more authentic, but it would have prevented millions of futile Mormon proxy baptisms from being performed

letusreason.org/LDS5.htm

“It is the baptism for the dead. For we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect” (referring to 1 Cor.15 15 and 18).

It is a fact that Mormonism from the beginning of its revelation to the end has been in communication with the dead. So we should not be surprised that the issue of salvation has something to do with the dead too. Baptism for the dead is an essential aspect of the fullness of the gospel. It is so essential in fact that no living person can be saved without it. Doctrine and Covenants 20:37 one reads those to be baptized must humble themselves, having “truly repented” of all their sins before being baptized. Baptism is regarded as essential to salvation and those, as the Pharisees and Lawyers (Luke 7:30), who reject baptism are thereby “forfeiting their claim to salvation.” (P. 130)

“The greatest responsibility in this world that God has laid upon us is to seek after our dead” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, page 7).

But this practice is never mentioned in the Book of Mormon! Then how can the Book of Mormon contain the fullness of the gospel if this is necessary for salvation? Seems some great and precious promises are missing in their own book!

In contrast the Bible teaches us not to seek the dead but the living.

Not only does the Book of Mormon never mention baptism for the dead, and I might add neither does the Bible, it also never mentions temple marriage or any of the other necessary requirements of gaining exaltation or Godhood. There is a good reason for this; they were developed and added as new revelation after the book was finished.

Since this is what occurred, it seems strange that the Doctrine and Covenants would claim that the Book of Mormon is “the fullness of the gospel” when such an important element is missing.

Joseph Fielding Smith, 10th prophet of the Mormon Church explains what this term means, “By fullness of the gospel is meant all the ordinances and principles that pertain to the exaltation in the celestial kingdom” ( Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.1, p. 160).

 

[iloveangels]

Title changed 2nd time by request.
I am on the verge of changing it to Godzilla Vs. the Smog monster.

Dressed in red velvet with satin trim. Got to have the red velvet with satin trim if you’re going to marry dead people.

 

[StephenKent]

" . . .Furthermore, according to wikipedia, in 2006 the village of Tremelo had a population of just over 13,000 people. (It also notes that the village is “most famous for” being the hometown Father Damien, a recently canonized saint.) I’m not sure what the population of Tremelo was in the mid-1800’s, but I’m guessing it was less than 13,000. Let’s say it had maybe 10,000 people. . . ."

I have noticed on these boards that it is about 98% Roman Catholics speaking to 98% Roman Catholics. Although the topics are directed at asking a question about the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, if anyone who is a Latter-day Saint answers a question, the response is personal attack and vituperation.

The statistics about the town Tremelo actually work against the poster. Even if the town had only 1,000 inhabitants, that is much more than sufficient for two or three or fourt families with the same surname to have a child named Joseph. Take the little hamlet of Tasso in the community of Lumarzo in the province of Genova in Liguria region of Italy. In 1840, the population was approximately 400 people. Yet between 1820 and 1850, thre were nineteen marriages of men with the Ferrera surname. Eight children named Giuseppe (Joseph) were born to those families. Four of them were grouped in the period from 1827 to 1831. Someone researching in American records could easily have an ancestor named Giuseppe Ferrera who is said in the 1860 census to be age 29, in the 1870 census to be age 42, in the 1880 census to be age 50 and in the 1900 census to be age 62 (this happens). And his 1902 obituary could say he was at the time of death age 62. None of the births occurs in 1830. No American record names his parents. An inexperienced researcher might just pick one of the four and be done with the research. Joseph is a very, very common name. Multiply that small population to make it a town of 13,000 and you can see what the difficulty is with your statistical analysis.

But beyond that. There indeed are people who have submitted names inappropriately and did so on purpose. I once saw in the database the name “Mickey Mouse.” I reported it and it was deleted. Non-Mormons have in the past had the ability to enter the database and submit names. Some Latter-day Saints have violated the Church’s expressly and repeatedly stated conditions that names be well researched and that extractions of names (such as extractions of names of Holocaust victims) not be submitted.

When you’re talking about millions upon millions of names, there obviously are going to be hundreds and even thousands of violations, giving posters near endless opportunity to complain. And you’re right about Ancestry.com (which is probably contributed to by Latter-day Saints to the tune of perhaps 2% of what it has in its databases, if that): lots of people invent names. A popular one, just like “Mrs. De Veuster,” is to take a man at the end of someone’s research line (let’s call him “John Doe”) and conclude that, obviously, he had a wife (else, there would have been no child), name her “Mrs. Doe.” That’s done a lot in genealogical “research.” That works its way into some of the “research” done by some Latter-day Saints.

What I see going on in these threads is (1) post a topic about something to do with the Latter-day Saints; (2) condemn the practice or doctrine; and (3) if someone who is Latter-day Saint posts anything in response to the question, bash the poster, too.

 

[KathleenGee]

Stephen…

I found it most unethical for Mormons to take Catholic parish records and use them in their temples, where we are not allowed to enter…even parents of children marrying a Mormon at their wedding/sealing…

How would you feel if the Catholic Church was taking Mormon records and bringing all these people into the Catholic Church? How would you feel if you heard this being done to members of your religion???

And it is forbidden to speak to the dead…or attempt to.

I read an article by a Mormon who was claiming the Mormons came upon a treasure trove of sacramental records of priests and nuns going back 1,000 years, and your religion was going to violate the dignity of their vocations by putting their names into some kind of baptism ceremony.

But then the Mormon writer was put off because now the Vatican said no more accessing our records…to think especially priests and religious would want to marry now … such a different mentality of thinking…and how unaware and lacking of understanding in those who give their entire lives to the kingdom of Christ.

Again…I have the impression now that if the Catholic Church claims an idea as heresy…Mormons will believe it. If the teaching is orthodox, in the deposit of Catholic faith, then Mormonism will consider it corrupt.

Is that true?

 

[TexanKnight]

I have noticed on these boards that it is about 98% Roman Catholics speaking to 98% Roman Catholics. Although the topics are directed at asking a question about the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, if anyone who is a Latter-day Saint answers a question, the response is personal attack and vituperation.

The problems is, anytime someone who knows the truth about the LDS corrects you or any other Mormon, you call it personal attacks

 

[KathleenGee]

I am also beginning to see where you are coming from, Stephen…

What Mormonism is now defining is that the Catholic Church mistranslated the Scriptures, that there were early teachers in ancient Christian times who pondered on so much of Scripture, that likewise, some of their treatises were in time deigned not in accord with the deposit of faith…like Origen…but Mormonism is using him and others to invalidate Mormonism…The Jews and Catholics to this day share some of the same perspective on parts of Scripture…

You are drawing on the claims of Joseph Smith and that group with him who helped formulate such ideas…as well as this Professor Ehrman…who are attempting to prove LDS right in the Church mistranslating Scripture.

A few men cannot invalidate hundreds of thousands of believers, teachers, theologians, of a faith culture that is 2,000 years old and is based on one 3,000 years old prior…These early Catholics took their faith most seriously and did not want to play the fool for anyone.

Their utmost concern was fidelity to Christ and the legacy of faith given us by the Apostles…Sealing, pre dead existence, post dead existence and marriage, now man made created dead ‘spouses’…this is not within Judeo Christian culture…

There was a group of feminist nuns who wanted to become priests and likewise stop daily Mass…the priests rebuked them for blaspheming Christ’s holy priesthood.

To see Mormons want to get hold of sacramental records…particularly sacred records of consecrated souls to God…who made solemn vows…and then baptize and seal them is approaching, in my mind…ignorance of what is true and holy…and akin to being sacrilegious…I realize those people don’t intend…and so it can’t be sinful on their part…

But nevertheless…to take the identity of consecrated souls and to misuse their choice, their vocation, their total dedication to God and to make up things like creating imagined spouses in the nether world, and put their sacred records to be used in secret ceremonies initiating against their will lives into something they would abhor…is just plain wrong and immoral.

If this is part of the idea how LDS will overtake Catholicism sooner than later by such activities, this religion is deceiving itself.

 

[tundramom]

Stephen,
Many of us used to BE Mormons. Myself, included.
Steph

 

[TexanKnight]

Stephen,
Many of us used to BE Mormons. Myself, included.
Steph

Amen.

And wanna know something? Even though I am no longer LDS, I STILL consider my time as a missionary as one oof the very greatest times of my life.

 

[JHow]

I tend to agree with Stephen that genealogical mistakes and mistaken identity are easily made, and are the likely source of many of the duplicate sealings, baptisms, and so forth.

In doing some genealogical work on my own family, several researchers and self included for many years believed our family came from North Carolina instead of South Carolina. There were several sources (census, published history) that provided conflicting information about a particular ancestor that led us to the wrong conclusion. It took years to sort out, and in ancestry dot com and familysearch dot org the mis-cues are still there and still being repeated by researchers who aren’t as careful.

Having said that, I don’t have the impression that the Mormon Church is particularly careful or sensitive to how these sealings appear to family members or outsiders. If the policy now is to avoid baptizing holocaust victims, for example, they should make that more clear to the researchers in their Family History Centers. I am familiar with the FHC on Wilshire Bvld. in Los Angeles, which is graciously open to the public, but, obviously, being Catholic (of Huguenot descent BTW ) I have not paid much attention to the IGI submittals or any of that.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Huh. Pretty weird that your parents would make the same completely honest and totally innocent mistake over and over again for “hours and hours” and “for many years.” The only plausible explanation is that “obviously” your parents “did not have sufficient information to discern” that the people they were entering into the database - for hours and hours and for years and years - were not actually related to them.

It was their church “calling”. A whole web of people setup that were given Catholic parish records by the Mormon church, to enter into their database. Strangely enough, this calling ended when they ran out of Catholic parish records to enter.

 

[iloveangels]

I have noticed on these boards that it is about 98% Roman Catholics speaking to 98% Roman Catholics. Although the topics are directed at asking a question about the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, if anyone who is a Latter-day Saint answers a question, the response is personal attack and vituperation.

Hello. This is Catholic Answers Forum, not Mormon Answers Forum.

If Mormons want to prosetylize among Catholics and convert them to their own weird religious views, then let them set up their own forums and get their own posting members. How stupid do you think we are, anyway???

BTW, the questions I’m seeing in here by Mormons are leading questions. So if you get an answer you don’t expect, you have nothing to complain about. People are typing in what they think about it, and you can’t control that, nor should you want to.

If what you want is to know about the Catholic faith, this is the place. Drop the silly Mormon doctrines, listen to what people tell you and learn about the Catholic faith.

On the other hand, if what you want is to prosetylize and confuse Catholics, then you’re in the wrong place. You shouldn’t be surprised when you get Catholic answers to your leading questions. You are in the CATHOLIC ANSWERS FORUM, after all.

Good gravy.

 

[HonoraDominum]

Stephen,
Many of us used to BE Mormons. Myself, included.
Steph

Me too.

And a lot of us have been Mormons, and not just “I converted for a year and then came back to the Catholic church” ex-Mos, but TBM, multi-generational, Seminary-attending, CTR ring-wearing, mission-serving, Endowment-receiving, scripture chase-winning, Young Women’s Medallion-earning, funeral potatoes-baking, Saturday’s Warrior-performing, “Book of Mormon between you”-dancing, “Johnny Lingo”-watching Mormons. Most of us are simply defending this board from the lies spread by those deceived by the wickedness and snares of the devil with very “Spay-shul” Utah brethren accents. We know how fast a person can fall for the lies, and we refuse to sit here and let them be smeared without vigorously defending the truth which we have found.

Also? All the Ten Cow Women in the house say HEEEY! :whackadoo:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[HonoraDominum]

It was their church “calling”. A whole web of people setup that were given Catholic parish records by the Mormon church, to enter into their database. Strangely enough, this calling ended when they ran out of Catholic parish records to enter.

My mother did this for years and years. Still does it, even though she’s left the church - she is a genealogy nut and realizes the value in the data collection, even if it’s by a deceitful church. They do more than Catholic parish records, they do census records, copies of family bibles, anything that is found. They call it “extraction”.