Was the Vatican ruling against Mormon baptisms unprecendented?

[mardukm]

Ah! A whole new layer to this complex onion!

Is this still the case today? Are single immersion baptisms invalid? If not, what changed and why?

Nothing has changed. Triple baptism (by immersion, ablution, whatever) has always been the norm in the Catholic Church. There was a short period (circa 7th century) when single ablution was performed by the Church in Spain to combat the theology of the Arian heretics (who used the triple baptism to signify three different essences). But that was very temporary to meet the needs of the Church in that particular locale during that particular time. Once the danger had passed, the normative form was resumed.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[GaryTaylor]

I don’t know why people are arguing that the reason the Mormon baptism is rejected is because it is not Trinitarian. From reading the original journalistic source (L’osservatore Romano), the rationale was because the Mormon conception of the Persons is not even Christian (God the Father being a glorified man, like Jesus). The conception of the Persons of course directly affects the Triadology. But it is not specifically their understanding of the Trinity, but rather their understanding of the Persons, which makes their Baptism devoid of “the intention of the Catholic Church.”

Blessings,
Marduk

Possibly overlooked the link was already posted from L’Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English
1 August 2001, page 4.

google.com/url?q=http://www.ewtn.com/library/theology/mormbap1.htm&sa=U&ei=22OCUMS2OYPY8gT2i4CoBQ&ved=0CBUQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFQFBoyVhwi1T1mToXK4w7ElSwFvg

 

[mercytruth]

I doubt prior to a US bishop (specifically one from Idaho) asking for clarification on the matter (since he would have understood Mormon belief more clearly) that the Vatican gave much thought to the matter.

Mormonism is a pretty much an obscure American church, at least up until recently. And I am sure that is how the Holy See saw it, if they even knew much about it in the first place.

Thru the 70’s 80’s etc, most people when they hear of “Mormon” they thought of the Osmonds and polygamy.

Of all the denominations which say they are the true church of Christ, and everyone else is apostate, the Mormons are the wealthiest and most influential.

Here is what St. Paul says, "And what I do I will continue to do, in order to end this pretext of those who seek a pretext for being regarded as we are in the mission of which they boast. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, who masquerade as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan masquerades as an angel of light. So it is not strange that his ministers also masquerade as ministers of righteousness."
(2 Corinth. 11:12-15)

May God have mercy on all of us, and deliver us from deception, and pride.

micah

 

[mercytruth]

Possibly overlooked the link was already posted from L’Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English
1 August 2001, page 4.

google.com/url?q=http://www.ewtn.com/library/theology/mormbap1.htm&sa=U&ei=22OCUMS2OYPY8gT2i4CoBQ&ved=0CBUQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFQFBoyVhwi1T1mToXK4w7ElSwFvg

quoting from the article:
The same principle was upheld by the Synod of Arles in 314 (cf. DH 123). Well known also is the struggle of St Augustine against the Donatists. The Bishop of Hippo affirms that the validity of the sacrament depends neither on the personal sanctity of the minister nor on his belonging to the Church.

So now we have the scenario where in an emergency an atheist or satanist can perform a valid baptism as long as he says the correct words and uses water. The reasoning being that the intent of an atheist is sanctified by the usage of the correct words and water.

It does not matter if such a one serves Satan, or does not believe in God, nor the forgiveness of sins, or whether he is an adulterer or murderer. The correct words and water will wash away the sins of the one baptized. It does not matter if the one that is to be baptized does not have the prayer of exorcism prayed over him.

So it is conceivable for such a person baptized by a pagan, and oppressed or possessed by demons could enter into the Roman Catholic church.

This is so different from the Constitutions of the Apostles which states that a baptism performed by a heretic is not valid, because a heretic is not an unblameable priest.

Maybe the Vatican’s ruling that Mormon baptisms are no longer valid is a breath of fresh air. Maybe from this point forward, the Roman Catholic church will now take into consideration the qualifications of the one performing the baptism, as well as their doctrine of belief.

God’s peace

micah

 

[Marie5890]

Of all the denominations which say they are the true church of Christ, and everyone else is apostate, the Mormons are the wealthiest and most influential.

\

Are you speaking in America?

I have no idea of the wealth of the LDS church, They dont disclose and never did when I was LDS.

Most influential? Where?

Do you really think the Holy See is concerned about the LDS church?
I dont…

To them, it’s an America church born from the 19 century AMerica…

 

[twopekinguys]

Of all the denominations which say they are the true church of Christ, and everyone else is apostate, the Mormons are the wealthiest and most influential.

(snipped)

May God have mercy on all of us, and deliver us from deception, and pride.

micah

And the only one to build a multi-billion dollar shopping mall, complete with condos.

I’m just saying.

 

[GaryTaylor]

intent of an atheist is sanctified by the usage of the correct words and water.

What intent refers to is the intent of the Catholic Church. The atheist senerio would lack this intent.

The Church intends to give the sacrament in such a way that an indelible character is given on the soul and the person is made a member of the Catholic Church thus the Mystical Body of Christ.

It does not matter if such a one serves Satan, or does not believe in God, nor the forgiveness of sins, or whether he is an adulterer or murderer. The correct words and water will wash away the sins of the one baptized. It does not matter if the one that is to be baptized does not have the prayer of exorcism prayed over him.

Yet this lacks the intent of the CC thus the will/seal of God=Grace. The intention of consecrating is required as defined by the Church. Therefore there is no consecration in the following such case when a priest {or whoever] does not intend to consecrate but only to make a pretense.

So it is conceivable for such a person baptized by a pagan, and oppressed or possessed by demons could enter into the Roman Catholic church.

Was it not true Judas broke bread with Jesus? As Augustine stated “How many sheep are without, how many wolves within?” Since none of us can read the innermost intentions of a minister’s heart or one entering the church, how, then, does any one of us know whether or not the sacraments we have received were valid?

In effect, St Robert Bellarmine points out that we can never have a certitude of Faith concerning the reception of a true sacrament, since no-one can see the intention of another. However, in truth we can never have such a certitude concerning human events. The greatest certitude that we can have is a moral certitude, which is also the certitude that we can have about any contingent, singular reality. However, it is perfectly possible to have a moral certitude within the Mystical Body of Christ. For “the mystery of lawlessness” is clarified only in the light of the “mystery of our religion”

This is so different from the Constitutions of the Apostles which states that a baptism performed by a heretic is not valid, because a heretic is not an unblameable priest.

I see no difference but in terminiology and further definition.

Maybe the Vatican’s ruling that Mormon baptisms are no longer valid is a breath of fresh air. Maybe from this point forward, the Roman Catholic church will now take into consideration the qualifications of the one performing the baptism, as well as their doctrine of belief.

They have as we see in history, nevertheless, its apparent this will be a re-occuring issue since the cunning individual will always attempt to undermine the will of the Lord and often in a sublime way. And as we know {The action is permitted by divine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. It is a great mystery that providence should permit diabolical activity, but “we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him.}” CC-275

The weeds grow along with the flowers. Generally speaking should satan enter the Church his only ability is to influence those who minds are outside of the Church, being the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit and this being visable or invisable.

 

[mercytruth]

Are you speaking in America?

I have no idea of the wealth of the LDS church, They dont disclose and never did when I was LDS.

Most influential? Where?

Do you really think the Holy See is concerned about the LDS church?
I dont…

To them, it’s an America church born from the 19 century AMerica…

I was only speaking of denominations which consider themselves Christian, and who at the same time say that they are the only true church of Jesus Christ, while everyone else is apostate. There are very few of these ‘denominations’ around, and their influence is very minimal. Whereas, the Mormon church has 15 members in the US Congress…

ldschurchnews.com/articles/60334/15-Mormons-serving-in-US-Congress.html

As for wealth, for such a church to consider themselves the only true church they have property holdings estimated at 30 billion.

reuters.com/article/2012/08/12/us-usa-politics-mormons-idUSBRE87B05W20120812

God’s peace

micah

 

[Marie5890]

I was only speaking of denominations which consider themselves Christian, and who at the same time say that they are the only true church of Jesus Christ, while everyone else is apostate. There are very few of these ‘denominations’ around, and their influence is very minimal. Whereas, the Mormon church has 15 members in the US Congress…

ldschurchnews.com/articles/60334/15-Mormons-serving-in-US-Congress.html

As for wealth, for such a church to consider themselves the only true church they have property holdings estimated at 30 billion.

reuters.com/article/2012/08/12/us-usa-politics-mormons-idUSBRE87B05W20120812

God’s peace

micah

Trust me, as a former Mormon who lived in the Mormon corridor for over a decade, they have great influence there.

But they dont have nearly the influence you give them credit for, outside of that. Infact, they are loosing more members then they are retaining.

Convert retention is abissmal to put it bluntly. Those boat load of temples that they have around the world are closed for but a very few hours a week, if that.
The “ordinance for the dead” that they do? The names that they do are recycled.

Their PR makes them look good. But the hard core reality is, well, they put on a good show for the public.

If you want to be concerned about the so-called “influence” you think they hold, then by all means do so…

But, IMO, it’s a waste of time and energy. They arent all that powerful

I dont know if you know this, but when Benedict XVI came to the USA back several years ago, he met with all kinds of leaders from various religious denominations, Christian and otherwise…But not any of the main GA’s from the LDS church…

 

[twopekinguys]

I was only speaking of denominations which consider themselves Christian, and who at the same time say that they are the only true church of Jesus Christ, while everyone else is apostate. There are very few of these ‘denominations’ around, and their influence is very minimal. Whereas, the Mormon church has 15 members in the US Congress…

ldschurchnews.com/articles/60334/15-Mormons-serving-in-US-Congress.html

As for wealth, for such a church to consider themselves the only true church they have property holdings estimated at 30 billion.

reuters.com/article/2012/08/12/us-usa-politics-mormons-idUSBRE87B05W20120812

God’s peace

micah

Looks like Catholics out number mormons in congress.

See it here.

Looks like there are more Catholic governors too. Check this out.

You are right though, the Catholic Church doesn’t have it’s own multi-billion dollar shopping mall.

BTW, talking about wealth for a church is kind of tacky don’t you think? I mean, most churches, Christian or not, don’t really talk about their wealth or property holdings now do they?

 

[gazelam]

Looks like Catholics out number mormons in congress.

You are right though, the Catholic Church doesn’t have it’s own multi-billion dollar shopping mall.

Catholics can have the shopping mall on condition that they take Harry Reid also!

 

[LivingWaters7]

Looks like Catholics out number mormons in congress.

See it here.

Looks like there are more Catholic governors too. Check this out.

Which shouldn’t be too surprising, since there are many times more Catholics than Latter-day Saints in this country.

You are right though, the Catholic Church doesn’t have it’s own multi-billion dollar shopping mall.

BTW, talking about wealth for a church is kind of tacky don’t you think? I mean, most churches, Christian or not, don’t really talk about their wealth or property holdings now do they?

Perhaps it would be interesting to also note what commercial property the Catholic Church owns throughout the world, at least to those interested in such things. I do believe there was/is recently a controversy regarding taxation law and commercial (or semi-commercial) property owned by the Catholic Church in Italy.

deseretnews.com/article/765561778/Mormon-church-hopes-mall-helps-Salt-Lake-downtown.html

Neither does The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints talk about its “wealth”.

 

[twopekinguys]

Catholics can have the shopping mall on condition that they take Harry Reid also!

Pass…LOL

But thanks for the offer.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Trust me, as a former Mormon who lived in the Mormon corridor for over a decade, they have great influence there.

But they dont have nearly the influence you give them credit for, outside of that. Infact, they are loosing more members then they are retaining.

I think it is clear that all churches are unfortunately losing many members, especially in Europe, and even the USA. The Catholic Church is not exempted from that.

ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/americas-religious-marketplace-real-catholic-problem-new-sales?page=1 (for one example)

Convert retention is abissmal to put it bluntly.

Perhaps it would be interesting to note Catholic convert retention rates.

Those boat load of temples that they have around the world are closed for but a very few hours a week, if that.

A few hours a week? I randomly checked the schedule for a few temples in places like Nigeria, Ghana, Bolivia, Switzerland, etc, and they are open for more than just a “few hours a week, if that”. Also, again, I think that practically all churches are having an issue with church attendance, especially in Europe and the USA, and the Catholic Church is not exempt from that either.

The “ordinance for the dead” that they do? The names that they do are recycled.

I would venture to guess that the majority of names submitted for proxy ordinances in the Lord’s temples are not “recycled”, and that new computer systems prevent issues such as that. I’m sure that members may at times (especially in the past) submit names more than once, especially under a different form of the name, however temples do not specifically go out of their way to reuse names of individuals that have already been offered proxy saving ordinances.

Their PR makes them look good. But the hard core reality is, well, they put on a good show for the public.

See above.

If you want to be concerned about the so-called “influence” you think they hold, then by all means do so…

But, IMO, it’s a waste of time and energy. They arent all that powerful

Perhaps, perhaps not. Being “powerful” isn’t really all that concerning. I personally like to think back to the New Testament Christians, and how “powerful” they were, and whether that was really important (not saying that you think it is).

I dont know if you know this, but when Benedict XVI came to the USA back several years ago, he met with all kinds of leaders from various religious denominations, Christian and otherwise…But not any of the main GA’s from the LDS church…

At least we were invited to an Ecumenical prayer service with him and others, for those interested in such things.

 

[mercytruth]

Trust me, as a former Mormon who lived in the Mormon corridor for over a decade, they have great influence there.

But they dont have nearly the influence you give them credit for, outside of that. Infact, they are loosing more members then they are retaining.

Convert retention is abissmal to put it bluntly. Those boat load of temples that they have around the world are closed for but a very few hours a week, if that.
The “ordinance for the dead” that they do? The names that they do are recycled.

Their PR makes them look good. But the hard core reality is, well, they put on a good show for the public.

If you want to be concerned about the so-called “influence” you think they hold, then by all means do so…

But, IMO, it’s a waste of time and energy. They arent all that powerful

I dont know if you know this, but when Benedict XVI came to the USA back several years ago, he met with all kinds of leaders from various religious denominations, Christian and otherwise…But not any of the main GA’s from the LDS church…

I am not so concerned with their material wealth and political influence, but as to the fact that I do not know of any organization that has been around as long as the Mormons who have an ongoing Quorom of Twelve Apostles. In effect, they are equating themselves with the authority of the twelve apostles of Jesus Christ.

lds.org/church/leaders/quorum-of-the-twelve-apostles?lang=eng

This is why I quoted 2 Corinth.11:12-15:
"And what I do I will continue to do, in order to end this pretext of those who seek a pretext for being regarded as we are in the mission of which they boast. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, who masquerade as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan masquerades as an angel of light. So it is not strange that his ministers also masquerade as ministers of righteousness."

According to the apostle Paul false apostles are ministers of Satan. As ministers of Satan, they have deceived and are deceiving millions of souls. We should be warning the body of Christ, as well as praying for their conversion. No one will do that if we think of them as fellow Christians, or as being harmless. You are doing a disservice to the warnings of St. Paul by minimizing their danger.

I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish every one with tears. (Acts 20:29-31).

I do not know of any other ‘so called major Christian’ organization that we would have the liberty to say such things, especially since the Vatican’s 2001 ruling on the invalidity of their baptisms.

God’ peace to you

micah

 

[twopekinguys]

I am not so concerned with their material wealth and political influence, but as to the fact that I do not know of any organization that has been around as long as the Mormons who have an ongoing Quorom of Twelve Apostles. In effect, they are equating themselves with the authority of the twelve apostles of Jesus Christ.

micah

But they actually have 15

Doesn’t the “first presidency” count as apostles?

15 is not biblical at all.

 

[Marie5890]

But they actually have 15

Doesn’t the “first presidency” count as apostles?

15 is not biblical at all.

Yes, the 1st Presidency and the 12 are all considered apostles…

And for a brief time(If I recall correctly), under Kimball, there were 3 counselors to him so there were 16…

N Eldon Tanner and Marion Romney were both quite frail of health.

 

[mercytruth]

I have said enough on the subject of Mormons. The quorom of 12 apostles itself always has 12 apostles eventhough there are 15, 16 or whatever total apostles who claim to have received the revelation of Jesus Christ.

One of the things about the Mormon religion is that it teaches that it is receiving ungoing revelation, which makes it capable of changing its position depending on which direction the wind is blowing. It is probably one of the most clever cults ever conceived by deception. It takes the form of the Christian faith publicly, but the underlying intent can mean something very differently to those in leadership at any given time.

I would recommend this evangelical website in explaining many of the past and present teachings of LDS with thorough citations and documentation.

mrm.org/adam-god

Pope John Paul II along with Cardinal Ratzinger were very courageous for overturning Rome’s position on the validity, or doubtfulness of Mormon baptisms by anouncing them to be invalid as of June 2001.

God’s peace to all,

micah

 

[gazelam]

One of the things about the Mormon religion is that it teaches that it is receiving ungoing revelation, which makes it capable of changing its position depending on which direction the wind is blowing. It is probably one of the most clever cults ever conceived by deception. It takes the form of the Christian faith publicly, but the underlying intent can mean something very differently to those in leadership at any given time…

I can’t let that one go by. Revelation is precisely what Peter received when he was being divinely prepared for Cornelius. The wind was blowing Gentile… Acts 10:9-17 (KJV) states:

9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:

10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,

11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon’s house, and stood before the gate,

Because of this revelation the ancient Church expanded from proselytizing just Jews to also proselytizing Gentiles. This was a divinely encouraged and divinely approved change of position for the ancient Church. Since God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, it’s reasonable to assume that He could want His church to change a position on something in modern times. That would require a modern-day revelation. Ancient apostles received revelation at address ancient problems and modern apostles receive revelation to address modern problems.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I can’t let that one go by. Revelation is precisely what Peter received when he was being divinely prepared for Cornelius. The wind was blowing Gentile… Acts 10:9-17 (KJV) states:

9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:

10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,

11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.

14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.

15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

17 Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon’s house, and stood before the gate,

Because of this revelation the ancient Church expanded from proselytizing just Jews to also proselytizing Gentiles. This was a divinely encouraged and divinely approved change of position for the ancient Church. Since God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, it’s reasonable to assume that He could want His church to change a position on something in modern times. That would require a modern-day revelation. Ancient apostles received revelation at address ancient problems and modern apostles receive revelation to address modern problems.

No new doctrine was given here. Jesus had already commissed the disciples:

"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Matthew 28:19-20

The Holy Spirit was given by Jesus to his Church at Pentecost. Doctrines represent the truth of Jesus Christ, therefore, they cannot change. To say doctrines change implies that Jesus changed, from moment to moment, creatong no sure place to stand. Truth doesn’t change with the times. Guidance is given to the Church and all the faithful, by the Holy Spirit. Guidance is for the faithful through the ages. If a moral position changes from day to day or year to year, what does that say about the claims a person or group is making?

Jesus also taught:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.” Matthew 5:17

The later vision, given to Peter, shows the implications of Jesus in relationship to the law. Christ fulfills the law. This is a Christian doctrine, that doesn’t change with the times. We conform ourselves to Christ, though the temptation is always there to turn that backwards, and try to make Christ conform to us, or "our times"and our ideas. Peter’s vision showed him how to conform to Christ.

Christ’s Church has never been orphaned. The Apostles ordained their successors, who are our Bishops. They are guided by the Holy Spirit, no less than Peter was.