Posted on 04/20/2010 7:56:29 PM PDT by delacoert
VATICAN CITY, JULY 17, 2001 (Zenit.org).- Prompted by questions about Mormon practices, the Vatican recently confirmed that the sect´s baptism is invalid.
Last month the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith noted the invalidity of the Mormons´ baptism given their misconception of the Trinity and, consequently, the identity of Christ.
Father Luis Ladaria, a theologian at the Pontifical Gregorian University, explained today in L´Osservatore Romano the Church´s view about Mormon baptism.
"The baptism of the Catholic Church and that of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," the theologian said, "differ essentially as regards faith in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in whose name baptism is conferred and, at the same time, in regard to Christ, who instituted it."
Father Ladaria pointed out that even non-Catholics can administer baptism validly, as the minister of the sacrament is, in fact, Christ himself. But the baptizer must do so in the name of the Trinity and "with the intention of doing what the Church does," he added.
Joseph Smith founded the Mormons in New York state in 1830. He was inspired to find the place were golden tablets were placed, which expressed the revelations of the prophet Mormon, written by him and his son Moroni. Mormonism is a "sacred history" rewritten in America, in which God revealed the "latter-day saints."
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith´s response is based on research requested by the U.S. bishops.
Father Ladaria said the formula used by the Mormons for baptism states that, "having received Christ´s mandate, I baptize you in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
But there is no real invocation of the Trinity, the theologian said, because, for the Mormons, the "Father," "Son" and "Holy Spirit" are not the three persons in which the one divinity subsists, but three gods who form a divinity.
The term divinity itself has no "substantial" content, because, according to this Mormon concept, divinity has come into existence given that the three gods have decided to unite and form the divinity to bring about the salvation of man. This divinity and man share the same nature and are "substantially the same," according to Mormon belief.
Such divergence in doctrine implies, Father Landaria said, that the Mormon minister does not have the intention, when baptizing, of doing what the Catholic Church does when it confers baptism.
You made plenty of popcorn just in case we see some “flamming” going on!
I just do not understand why with some of these faith threads, there is so much flamming going on? This really HURTS the Christian faith communites here on FR.
How very strange that you think pointing out the differences in peoples' theology is "putting them down".
For quite a while -- at least 33 years -- Mormonism has officially communicated that it doesn't worship the same Christ as the Christian world. Here, let me show you a quote from one of its official magazines (Ensign Magazine):
“It is true that many of the Christian churches worship a different Jesus Christ than is worshipped by the Mormons.” – LDS publication, Ensign Magazine, May 1977, p. 26
So Mormons have been saying this for years, and how many times have you taken the opportunity to admonish them for supposedly "forsak[ing]...fellow worshipers"?
Nah, Lds are on record as worshiping a different Christ...as its former "prophet" Hinckley has said publicly on at least two occasions.
(Oh, that's why polygamy suddenly dropped 90% in 1890 when the Lds "prophet" suddenly made some announcement that year...because he was just a state's puppet???)
(Hey, if you were at this time auditioning for godhood, you'd be on your best behavior, too)
Sorry, but millions of Protestants baptize (not dedicate) their infants. In fact, Wikipedia says: Most Christians practice infant baptism...the Anglican Communion, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, some Church of the Nazarene, the Reformed Church in America, the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ (UCC), and the Continental Reformed.
(And the Lutherans were the original Protestants under Luther)
Besides, are you going to make up a retro active baby circumcision "dedication" to explain why Jews circumcized babies @ 8 days? (In reality, circumcision, explains Paul to the Colossians, was a pre-cursor to baptism...and it was done to mark them as belonging to the covenant people of God)
...and then let the child/adult be baptized when he/she wants to accept Christ’s mandate for baptism, and make a public declaration of accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior?
The major problem here is that many NT passages don't explain baptism as an act of man; but rather as an act of God through man. The power, even something like the book of Acts (Acts 2) discussing the remission of sin. But sorry, no man has that power (to bring sin into remission). That's like saying we have the solo power to bring cancer into remission.
Just because the god of this world uses multiple portal entry points to haul his agenda into the world, doesn't write off any given one.
Wow, Mormons are almost as bad for the world as Ed Schultz and Randi Rhodes claim George W. Bush was! Hmmm, now that I think about it, I bet the Mormon tradition of polygamy was the direct result of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney messing around with time machines. Probably why Solomon had hundreds of wives and concubines...
Are you now claiming having 700 wives and 300 concubines should be widely emulated simply because it's "biblical?" (Hey, Hosea's wife, Gomer, kept her prostitution trade going post-marriage)...I guess that makes it "biblical" -- and if consistency has any semblence, some cult could...
...head off to a desert island,
commandeer its culture,
and practice "marital prostitution"...
and if any FREEPER dare critique such a thing...
you'd rush it to "defend" it all as a "biblically" sourced practice??? Really?
“Yet Catholics will defend your religion at FR. Go figure.”
I think that is a factor of who Catholic Freepers see things like the “ Catholic Church is the whore of babylon” from. It isn’t LDS Freepers. If LDS started expressing the belief that Catholics are goddess worshipping idolaters as much as some other sorts of Freepers often do, then I reckon you would probably see Catholics more willing to criticize the LDS faith more often.
Freegards
You will no doubt notice that the same blustering poster who asserted she/he would refute any specious comments has conveniently avoided even reading the excerpted material from his/her own religion’s documents! Typical of Mormonism apologists, blind naysayers with ears and eyes shut off from TRUTH about their cult.
Excellent post.
I don’t know how you’d get from point A to point X, because I don’t go way off topic to keep attacking something.
Someone stated the marriage age In Utah was “so low,” (for lack of a better term), and that the state was implicitly inconventional in that respect, and which I EASILY DISPROVED, BECAUSE IT IS A FALSE FACT and not opinion which cannot be argued. I therefore posted information about a few of the legal ages around the Country, and how they are YOUNGER that Utah.
The misguided previous poster said it was due to polygamy (Which actually is polygyny). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is neither the founding force of polygyny, practiced around the world, and throughout time, nor is the legal marrage age in Utah novel, because it is HIGHER than a great deal of state, the previous post was a lie at worst, and conjured “fact” to sound intelligent at best.
That’s why I love facts, they either are true, or false, where opinion is not, opinion is an emotionally based response, based on facts, whether they be true or false. It’s up to the poster to find true facts upon which to base their opinions, not just say whatever they feel. Unless that believe FR is a soapbox, which is fine, I just prefer not to be pinged to that hogwash, pretending to be fact.
See, I deal in facts, and I can pull apart false arguments easily. Now you’re trying to misdirect what was being talked about. So if you’re responding to someone else, ping them please, because I don’t care to hear opinion, unless there’s many facts upon which it is based, that I can understand. Thank you.
Please,
You need to check your mail!!!!!!!!!
Hmmm...those 60,000 mormon missionaries who knock on the doors of Christians and tell them that Joseph Smith "restored" the "one true church" are in fact, implying that the Catholic Church is INDEED the figurative "whore of babylon"...and I can testify that from my years as a mormon that view was held by many members.
Perhaps FR Catholics might think of the thousands of missionaries out there prosletyzing against Catholicism (and about the millions of Catholics who have been baptized after their death and confirmed as members of the mormon church)...while they defend mormonism on FR against the handful of us who post the truth about mormonism.
The point of clarification on this thread is that mormonism is not recognized as being Christian to begin with based upon a fundmental doctrinal point - mormonism is polytheistic (belief in many gods) and not monotheistic (belief in only one God). As a simple matter of doctrine this must be made clear.
“...implying that the Catholic Church is INDEED the figurative “whore of babylon”...”
I thought we were talking about FR? I’ve never seen a LDS imply that kinda stuff on FR. Doesn’t mean they don’t believe it, or their faith doesn’t teach it. I have seen all sorts of Christians proclaim that kind of stuff about the Catholic Church on FR, and pretty often. I’m just saying that on FR, that stuff doesn’t come from LDS. Which is a pretty fair statement, right?
Freegards
First, Neuhaus is writing as an advocate of interreligious cooperation. He makes a hopeful note on at least two occasions, IIRC, that given enough time, even the Mormons will realize their religion is antithetical to what Jesus actually stated His purpose was for living, being crucified, and rising from the grave:
"Increasingly, at least among some Mormons, the claim is that they are Christians in substantively the same way that others are Christians.
It is a claim we should question but not scorn. Such a claim contains, just possibly, the seed of promise that over time, probably a very long time, there could be within Mormonism a development of doctrine that would make it recognizable as a peculiar but definite Christian communion."
Perhaps the larger picture of this essay is that any man-made religion can make claims of 'being a more pure form of some parent religion', but the proof of same is found through comparative application. In Joe Smith's case, he founded Mormonism with the assertion that Christianity --during the age of the Catholic Church carrying the Gospel to all the world! no less-- was absent from humanity until Smith's god re-established the gospel through the sexual predator, Joseph Smith and his subsequent sexually degenerate leaders.
While I am all for interreligious cooperation where the principles of freedom of expression and 'do no harm' dictate the common goals, I find it interesting that Neuhaus begins his essay as an interreligious pleading, but draws it to a close with a cautionary note:
"I am skeptical about the more dramatic projections of Mormon growth in the future.
It depends in larger part on developments internal to the LDS and transformations in its self-understanding and self-presentation to the world. The leadership of the LDS will have to decide whether its growth potential is enhanced or hampered by presenting Mormonism as a new religion or as, so to speak, another Christian denomination. Sometimes they seem to want to have it both ways.
As for the rest of us, we owe to Mormon Americans respect for their human dignity, protection of their religious freedom, readiness for friendship, openness to honest dialogue, and an eagerness to join hands in social and cultural tasks that advance the common good. That, perhaps, is work enough, at least for the time being."
The fundamental problem in interreligious apologetics is the tolerance of anti-Christian doctrine and assertions. Jesus was not so tolerant, IIRC. And He made it plain that He had not come to dwell among us in an effort to promote interreligious cooperation or pernicious tolerance where the eternal destiny of the human soul/spirit is at stake.
Surely it has not escaped your attention that there are folks who post to these threads on Mormonism who are mightily concerned for the eternal destiny of good people trapped in Mormonism's heresies. For their efforts they are maligned by atheist who post regularly and spat upon by Mormonism apologists who work assiduously to divert attention from the facts dug out of the myriad of Mormonism heresies.
Thanks- I happen to agree with your concerns about interreligious dialogue. For what purpose? and for how long?
If your ox gets gored I will be sure to ping you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.