Was Brigham Young's Mormon baptism valid?

[valient_Lucy]

Any children I have I baptize immediately in the hospital, prior to the baptism by the Church. I know it’s one Baptism for the remission of sins, but I guess God can decide which one is valid for my kids. I’m not taking chances though.

Re baptizing a person who has been validly baptized is considered an insult to the Holy Spirit.

 

[valient_Lucy]

Your church is apostate. It has no priesthood authority to baptize anybody.

zerinus

Evidence please?

 

[Deconi]

Mormon baptisms are currently considered invalid by the Roman Catholic Church. I had to be rebaptized last April apparently because Mormonism doesn’t have the same view of the Trinity.

It is well known that Mormonism’s view of the Godhead developed from a very Trinitarian stance as found in the Book of Mormon and early Mormon documents to the present belief in Tritheism. Early Mormonism’s view of the Godhead was much like the current view of one of Mormonism’s offshoots, the Community of Christ. As far as I know Community of Christ baptisms are considered valid by the Catholic Church.

So was the baptism received by early Mormons like Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, etc. valid? It seems to me that early Mormon baptisms would be considered valid by the Catholic Church because they occurred before the Mormon Church’s view of God went astray. Was Brigham Young simply one of the “separated brethren” rather than a non-Christian?

You can reason this out. The answer is NO!

Smith did not ‘depart’ from Christianity.

He STARTED his own religion! He stated that God AND His Son both came and spoke with him and gave him The Book of Mormon. Therefore EVERYTHING has a new beginning from that point! ** If it was true that God AND Jesus visited him, all else about Christianity is FALSE.**

This is WHY Mormons are not thought of as Christians. Because the alternative is also TRUE.

I have ‘bought’ my ticket!

 

[mom2three]

We’re all in danger of dying at any minute of any day. Seeing as how the Church has taught that babies either go to hell, or limbo in the past and they still haven’t made a decision on the matter. I’m not comfortable waiting the requisite month or so (some parishes longer) to have my children baptized, no way…

In the future I’ll let the Parish Priest know, but God forbid we are killed in an auto accident out of the hospital and my new baby is floating in limbo for eternity, or kept out of Heaven because she didn’t receive baptism.

I honestly don’t believe that God would do such a thing. But when you baptize them yourself you shouldn’t need to also have the Church do so… and if they do, it should be a “conditional baptism”.

I definitely understand your fear… since I was in a hurry to baptize my children upon entering the Church… However, I don’t believe for one moment that God, who is all merciful, would condemn a baby to hell due to lack of baptism. In fact, since it would be your desire to have the child baptized right away, if they didn’t make it in time, I’m sure that baptism by desire would apply here.

 

[mom2three]

“This means that St. Augustine and the African Fathers believed that unbaptized infants share in the common positive misery of the damned, and the very most that St. Augustine concedes is that their punishment is the mildest of all, so mild indeed that one may not say that for them non-existence would be preferable to existence in such a state”

St. Augustine taught it, and he is considered a doctor of the Church. Either way limbo is no place I want my child to go. And the Church clearly taught this for nearly 2,000 years.

Limbo was only a theory and not taught as dogma of the Church. Otherwise, we’d believe in it today.

 

[mom2three]

Your Parish priest should be at the hospital waiting to baptize the child immediately after birth.

I agree with this because their fate is unknown. Despite the fact that I believe that God shows mercy, is not bound by the sacraments, wills that all will be saved, and that the baby would go to heaven based on “baptism by desire” of the parents… I think it would be best to have the priest present at the birth to baptize babies, since we really do NOT know what happens with certainty.

 

[Matariel]

All your posts consist of cut and pastes. No brains no pains.

zerinus

I guess “no brains, no pains” would come in handy when believing in the hokey dreamed-up Israelite civilizations that supposedly existed on this continent.

Last time I checked that is considered absurd by all non-Mormon archeologists and anthropologists.

 

[why_me]

If Brigham Young was baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinitarian formula, with the understanding of the Trinitarian belief system I would guess it to be valid. If that belief system “changed” later then it wouldn’t negate a legitimate baptism.

I can baptize someone using the Trinitarian formula and it’s valid. Any children I have I baptize immediately in the hospital, prior to the baptism by the Church. I know it’s one Baptism for the remission of sins, but I guess God can decide which one is valid for my kids. I’m not taking chances though.

All mormons are bapitized in the name of the father, the son and the holy ghost. But there baptisms are still considered invalid. I am afraid that there are other discriminatory reasons at work to disqualify a mormon baptism.

 

[why_me]

Mormon baptisms are currently considered invalid by the Roman Catholic Church. I had to be rebaptized last April apparently because Mormonism doesn’t have the same view of the Trinity.

It is well known that Mormonism’s view of the Godhead developed from a very Trinitarian stance as found in the Book of Mormon and early Mormon documents to the present belief in Tritheism. Early Mormonism’s view of the Godhead was much like the current view of one of Mormonism’s offshoots, the Community of Christ. As far as I know Community of Christ baptisms are considered valid by the Catholic Church.

So was the baptism received by early Mormons like Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, etc. valid? It seems to me that early Mormon baptisms would be considered valid by the Catholic Church because they occurred before the Mormon Church’s view of God went astray. Was Brigham Young simply one of the “separated brethren” rather than a non-Christian?

Brigham Young and Joseph Smith and most other early mormons were most likely first baptized in the church of their birth before they converted to mormonism. And so, they were most likely baptized at birth. However, since mormons are baptized in the name of the father and the son and the holy ghost, their baptisms should be valid.

 

[why_me]

Baptismal Prayer

The wording of the baptismal prayer used in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is prescribed in the earliest compilation of instructions for Church operations (D&C 20). When an individual is baptized, the person with the proper priesthood authority goes down into the water with the candidate, raises his right arm to the square, calls the individual by the full legal name, and says, “Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen,” and then immerses the candidate (D&C 20:73). A version of the prayer that differs only slightly from this was given by Jesus Christ to the Nephites and is recorded in the Book of Mormon (3 Ne. 11:25).

Earlier in the Book of Mormon there is a somewhat different account of the baptismal prayer that was spoken. When Alma1 in the second century B.C. established the Church among the Nephites, he prayed: “O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart” (Mosiah 18:12). The baptismal prayer that followed emphasized the covenant represented in baptism and the need for a subsequent baptism of the Spirit: “I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world” (Mosiah 18:13).

farms.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=51&chapid=346

 

[RebeccaJ]

whyme,

First, why would you belong to a Church (the Catholic Church) who you believe randomly discriminates?

Second, Young was a Methodist before he was a Mormon. He converted at age 23. Prior to that, his parents were Unitarian, which has no baptism required, but if baptism is chosen it would not be valid as Unitarians deny the Trinity, entirely. Methodist baptisms are considered valid by the Catholic Church.

Third, who cares what make-believe people did in the BoM? A fictional account of something that never happened doesn’t have any bearing on the question, at all, as to whether or not Mormon baptisms are valid.

Fourth, LDS do not recognize Catholic baptisms as valid. Do you believe this is for discriminatory reasons?

 

[AMDGtoo]

However, since mormons are baptized in the name of the father and the son and the holy ghost, their baptisms should be valid.

No, the intentions of Mormons are not those of Christ’s Church. Mormon and Christian belief systems are not the same. Mormons might have all the fancy words that seem okay, but in their baptisms, Mormons simply “get wet”–nothing more.

 

[why_me]

Show me where the Church ever taught that unbaptised infants go to hell.

Their fate was not good. I remember as a boy hearing that unbaptized infants or babies went to hell or limbo. And many parents grieved for the babies unbaptized soul if they lost them at birth or before the christening.

It was a fact of catholic life and left unquestioned.

 

[why_me]

No, the intentions of Mormons are not those of Christ’s Church. Mormon and Christian belief systems are not the same. Mormons might have all the fancy words that seem okay, but in their baptisms, Mormons simply “get wet”–nothing more.

But it is in the wording. We can not be so judgemental about it. They are baptized in the father’s, son’s and holy ghost’s name.

 

[RebeccaJ]

But it is in the wording. We can not be so judgemental about it. They are baptized in the father’s, son’s and holy ghost’s name.

That is not why a Mormon baptism is invalid. The wording may be the same, the INTENT, to baptize as the Catholic Church baptizes, is not. If it were, Mormons would have no need to baptize a Catholic, in this life or by proxy.

And yes, it is the responsibility of the Catholic Church to JUDGE what is correct.

 

[Matariel]

But it is in the wording. We can not be so judgemental about it. They are baptized in the father’s, son’s and holy ghost’s name.

Yes, but the Mormon understanding of the Godhead is so radically different than the Christian one, that the when they say “Father, Son Holy Spirit” they mean something so far removed from the Catholic Trinity, that they corrupt the INTENT of the Sacrament. (Remember, intent, form, and matter are the three things necessary for a valid Sacrament.) Thus, all Mormon “baptisms” are utterly null and void, as well as completely invalid and illicit.

For instance, Mormons confuse St. Michael with Christ and Adam with God the Father. Their deities are anthropomorphic, with human bodies (indeed, their gods once were humans.) They are henotheists. They believe in the deification of man (which, Catholics do too, but it is way different.) Some believe in a Heavenly Mother. They believe God has many wives.

The list goes on and on.

Bottomline, they do not believe anything remotely similar to the Catholic Trinitarian belief.

 

[AMDGtoo]

Their fate was not good. I remember as a boy hearing that unbaptized infants or babies went to hell or limbo.

Not to hell (the child hasn’t committed personal sin) and limbo was not an official teaching of the Church–it was instead a teaching of a theologian trying to reconcile Christ’s command that all should be baptized with His love and mercy. It was understood to be a state of natural happiness.

And many parents grieved for the babies unbaptized soul if they lost them at birth or before the christening.

Yes, it is sad to possibly lose a loved one, no matter what age. I know that I grieve for my daughter who converted to Mormonism…and for my grandchildren (her children).

 

[zerinus]

I guess “no brains, no pains” would come in handy when believing in the hokey dreamed-up Israelite civilizations that supposedly existed on this continent.

Last time I checked that is considered absurd by all non-Mormon archeologists and anthropologists.

Do you know how old this thread is?

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Brigham Young and Joseph Smith and most other early mormons were most likely first baptized in the church of their birth before they converted to mormonism. And so, they were most likely baptized at birth. However, since mormons are baptized in the name of the father and the son and the holy ghost, their baptisms should be valid.

Christianley no longer seems to post here. He changed his username (I for got to what), and has not posted here for a long time as far as I know.

zerinus