Was the Vatican ruling against Mormon baptisms unprecendented?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mercytruth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Micah,

I am assuming you are aware that Mormons dont believe in original sin. 🙂

That would go to not having the right intent, right off the bat…
 
twopekinguys said:
What is the point you are trying to get too? You have beat around all of the bushes, why not just come out and let us know what your real question is.

Also, it has been posed to you twice, about mormons not accepting Christian baptisms, but you have avoided them completely.

Why doesn’t the mormon church recognize anyone else’s? Is that unprecedented? 😛
Click to expand...
What has changed since the Roman Catholic Church has admitted Mormons into the Church prior to 2001 with ‘conditional baptisms’? I am somewhat confused with the explanation of ‘intent’ with regard to a difference in the understanding of the Trinity.
I thought all that mattered was that the form, “In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” was present.

God’s peace

micah
 
Marie5890 said:
Micah,

I am assuming you are aware that Mormons dont believe in original sin. 🙂

That would go to not having the right intent, right off the bat…
Click to expand...
Yes, but is it not likely that there other Christian denominations who do not also?

God’s peace

micah
 
mercytruth said:
I thought all that mattered was that the form, “In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” was present.

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
No, that is not all that matters. Intent does too.

What happened was it was never brought the the intention of the Vatican for clarification.

I do believe it started with a bishop from Idaho (highly populated part of the Mormon corridor) who wanted clarification as to whether or not the LDS baptism was valid since he was having former Mormons joining the Church.

He wrote to the Vatican. It was then that it was looked at closely and the ruling came down for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, head up by Cardinal Ratzinger (Benedict XVI)

Hope that clears up your confusion. 👍
 
mercytruth said:
Marie,

Thank you very much for that listing. I noticed that this list was Revised in 2009.

I wonder if others were included in this list since the ruling of the Mormons in 2001.

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
Perhaps with Cardinal Ratzinger’s ruling in 2001, there probably have been.

It may not have been something that was looked at closely prior to that Idaho Bishop asking the question for clarification.
 
Stephen168 said:
I was curious what this means:

[The second key reason for the ruling, the Osservatore says, is the origin of the LDS baptism.

"The Mormon baptism, which would have its origins not in Christ but at the start of creation, is not a Christian baptism,"](Vatican rules LDS baptisms 'invalid' | WWRN - World-wide Religious News) the Osservatore wrote.
Click to expand...
Gonna guess that it has to do with the LDS doctrine that priesthood authority was “restored” and not passed down thru apostolic lines…IE the whole idea of apostasy and the priesthood authority taken from the earth…

Remember that Mormons believe in a great apostasy, there for they see ALL baptism but their own as invalid.

It’s one of the reasons they do baptism for the dead in their temples. They believe those who have died without having been baptized thru Mormon authority need to be re-baptized…

The idea that Mormon baptism is invalid in the eyes of the Catholic Church is not of a concern for them, because they feel the same about anyone who has not be baptized Mormon.
 
Marie5890 said:
Gonna guess that it has to do with the LDS doctrine that priesthood authority was “restored” and not passed down thru apostolic lines…IE the whole idea of apostasy and the priesthood authority taken from the earth…
Click to expand...
I know they believe this “authority” predated Christ, so maybe that is what the Vatican is referring to.
 
The crux is that the Christian Trinity is not the same as the LDS Godhead.

There’s nothing wrong with the ruling - while Mormons incorporate Christian terms and ideas into their religion, it is not the same as Christianity on some very profound levels.
 
Marie5890 said:
Perhaps with Cardinal Ratzinger’s ruling in 2001, there probably have been.
It may not have been something that was looked at closely prior to that Idaho Bishop asking the question for clarification.
Click to expand...
I did some research on the non-valid Baptism denominations. All of them either have no baptism, symbolic baptism (no ritual), or baptize in the name of Jesus Christ only.

The only exceptions in the list are the Mormons and the Christadelphians.

Both of these baptize in the name of the Father, of the Son and the Holy Spirit for the forgiveness of sins. Christadelphians do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ prior to his human birth.

Thank you for all your references,
God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
 
LivingWaters7 said:
True, perhaps.

Do all traditional Christians accept the doctrine of original sin, and that baptism washes it away?

Thanks (I’ll be back a later, running to class!)
Click to expand...
If I’m remembering correctly, evangelicals and those of the reformed tradition don’t believe that baptism washes away original sin. Are their baptisms invalid?
 
benjohnson said:
The crux is that the Christian Trinity is not the same as the LDS Godhead.

There’s nothing wrong with the ruling - while Mormons incorporate Christian terms and ideas into their religion, it is not the same as Christianity on some very profound levels.
Click to expand...
Yet Arian baptisms were accepted anciently, and they were non-Trinitarian, denying “the Christian Trinity”.
 
twopekinguys said:
You notice that poster is Orthodox, and not Roman Catholic. Take it up with him/her…😃
Click to expand...
Considering that I posted a canon from the Second Ecumenical Council, it should apply to Roman Catholics as well, unless Roman Catholics no longer follow the Ecumenical Councils. As other posters have also said, the Catholic rationale for rejecting Mormon baptisms seems to hinge upon intent, not wholly upon their incorrect trinitarian teaching. This is the same argument that was made against Anglican orders. Even though they had what could be considered a valid form of ordination, even after they altered it, because their intent was not to confer the ordination which the Roman Catholic Church confers, they therefore could no longer validly ordain people. Mormons do not intend to give the same baptism which the Roman Catholic Church does, therefore, their baptisms are invalid, so the argument goes.
 
Cavaradossi said:
Mormons do not intend to give the same baptism which the Roman Catholic Church does, therefore, their baptisms are invalid, so the argument goes.
Click to expand...
There in lies the answer, and I do believe I indicated that in a previous post.
 
mercytruth said:
What has changed since the Roman Catholic Church has admitted Mormons into the Church prior to 2001 with ‘conditional baptisms’? I am somewhat confused with the explanation of ‘intent’ with regard to a difference in the understanding of the Trinity.
I thought all that mattered was that the form, “In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” was present.

God’s peace

micah
Click to expand...
Intent is, and always was a key element in the baptismal process.

Valid baptism consists of 1. Matter (flowing water) 2. Form (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) 3. Intent (to do what the Catholic Church teaches)

So, as you can see, your assumption that only form was important was incorrect.

I am not sure how else to explain it other than how I already have. If mormons do not (and they don’t) believe in the Trinity as defined by mainstream Christianity, then it is impossible to have the proper intent as defined by mainstream Christianity.

Since those two elements are lacking (and it only takes one), then the mormon baptism is invalid.

Again, please stop avoiding the question that has been posed to you on two previous occasions.

Why doesn’t the mormon church recognize a Christian baptism performed outside of the mormon church? This is the 3rd request.
 
LivingWaters7 said:
If I’m remembering correctly, evangelicals and those of the reformed tradition don’t believe that baptism washes away original sin. Are their baptisms invalid?
Click to expand...
IF they don’t believe it washes away all sin (including original sin) committed prior to the baptism, then no, it wouldn’t be valid.

There is no blanket answer to this question considering how many different denominations there are these days. They would have to be looked at individually.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top