It's that time of year again-the dirty forehead club

[Meriweather]

Proxy baptism

Proxy baptism is a living person, acting as proxy, is baptized by immersion on behalf of a deceased person. If this is not your definition, please give us an update. It is certainly what other members of your faith have told me.

No one has any right to do something on the behalf of another without expressed permission. I believe in one baptism, and I have been baptized. No one has the right to undermine the beliefs of another. The LDS Church knows this--and so do you. If people would like an LDS baptism after their death, then you best get it in writing before they pass. Otherwise, as I said, pick up a phone book and baptize all of us while we are still living, mailing us all a postcard while you are at it. See how well that goes.

 

[Meriweather]

Yes, through Peter, James and John, who received their Priesthood authority from Jesus Christ, came and conferred the true Priesthood on Joseph Smith who in turn passed the authority by and through authority all the way down to me.

I understand that is your belief. It is far from the belief of many others. Is it too much to ask that you respect the faith of others? If it is, I truly am sorry for you.

 

[Cougarbear]

We have already gone through this. Catholic belief is that even infants can be part of the Body of Christ and brought into the Kingdom of God. The "process" is baptism, and from then on the "process" is loving the child, teaching the child about God and right from wrong as age permits. We certainly can pray over our children.

Apparently we are not as hung up on sin as you seem to be as we are confident sins are forgiven. Do you doubt your own sins are forgiven, or are you saving that doubt for non-LDS?

At the appropriate time and age, a Catholic child will learn to confess sins, to do penance and make restitution that is age appropriate.

It is none of your concern if Catholic understanding of Original Sin does not match Joseph Smith's. We do not follow Joseph Smith, but Christ and the original Apostles. May your way be blessed as well. I believe God watches over all.

Ahhh...now the truth comes out. You don't believe in current revelation. So, how then can the Holy Ghost be any part of your connection to God? See, we believe in Christ. And, we believe Christ called Joseph Smith to open up this the last dispensation of the earth and man. To restore His Church on the Earth along with the Authority to perform the necessary ordinances for the salvation and exaltation of mankind. The apostolic succession was broken. Even Paul said their would be an apostasy. Therefore, a restoration is necessary. Restoring Prophecy, Revelation, Priesthood Authority, Correct Doctrine Lost, Ordinance and Proper Administration, The House of God (Temple), The New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage and more. The Heavens are again open is our message. No longer do we have to live in darkness of the dark ages of apostasy. The Godhead lives in three distinct and separate personages of The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost. We no longer have to be condemned because of Adam's sin.

Baptism isn't the ordinance that brings us membership in the Kingdom of God. Confirmation is that ordinance. You have it backwards. How did that happen? Baptism is only for the remission of sins. And, a baby cannot sin. After Baptism, one can be confirmed a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost by one with the authority to do so. This is what is Biblical. Uggg...

 

[Cougarbear]

Proxy baptism is a living person, acting as proxy, is baptized by immersion on behalf of a deceased person. If this is not your definition, please give us an update. It is certainly what other members of your faith have told me.

No one has any right to do something on the behalf of another without expressed permission. I believe in one baptism, and I have been baptized. No one has the right to undermine the beliefs of another. The LDS Church knows this--and so do you. If people would like an LDS baptism after their death, then you best get it in writing before they pass. Otherwise, as I said, pick up a phone book and baptize all of us while we are still living, mailing us all a postcard while you are at it. See how well that goes.

HAHAHA!!! Coming for a Church that gave ultimatums to the Indigenous people of the America's or committed genocide upon them.
It's your words that we are undermining another's beliefs. No, we are simply offering the correct belief of Christ and it's up to others to accept or reject. See, an apostasy happened for nearly 1,800 years. Today, the Church of Jesus Christ has been restored and we do all things in the name of Jesus Christ. Heck, your Church can't even name your Church after Jesus Christ. Instead, you name it after a place, Rome. :-/~
No need to get the rights of the dead in writing. Most of those people don't know how to write or read. Including most Christians, who can't read and comprehend their own Bibles. Jesus Christ has given us all the authority to baptize for the dead, washing and annointings and their Endowment Covenants. The person still has to expressly accept it. Look at it this way, if it's right, then you have an insurance policy into the Kingdom of God. If it's wrong, then no big deal.

 

[Cougarbear]

I understand that is your belief. It is far from the belief of many others. Is it too much to ask that you respect the faith of others? If it is, I truly am sorry for you.

Oh, I respect your faith. But, that isn't what we are doing here. We are debating and discussing. You are doing a great job too.

 

[Cougarbear]

No, that is not our doctrine. Our doctrine is that those who have not heard or cannot believe are left in the hands of a loving and merciful God. Please do not spread errors about the Catholic faith.

Doesn't the Pope do some sort of ordinance that makes marriages not by Catholics approved of God? Ya, I've heard of that. Same with baptisms and stuff like that.
What is that thing that priests do that allows you to commit some sins and not have to worry about it with God? Indulgences? Ya, where you could buy them because they would be forgiven after the purgatory thing. So, I buy 2 indulgences and I can go murder someone and never have to worry with God because I can be forgiven in Purgatory.

 

[Meriweather]

So, how then can the Holy Ghost be any part of your connection to God?

The Holy Spirit has always been a part of my life, and I by that I mean from since I was a mere toddler. You despise infant baptism. I do not because I have lived it. The Holy Spirit is with me--and because of this, I am certain the Holy Spirit is with many of all faiths and denominations.

 

[Meriweather]

Baptism is only for the remission of sins.

And that is the belief of the LDS faith. In the Catholic faith it is so much more. As I said, I know this because I have lived it.

 

[Meriweather]

Baptism isn't the ordinance that brings us membership

"Membership" doesn't begin to define baptism. In Baptism we are all part of the Body of Christ.

 

[Meriweather]

Doesn't the Pope do some sort of ordinance that makes marriages not by Catholics approved of God? Ya, I've heard of that. Same with baptisms and stuff like that.

No.

 

[Meriweather]

So, I buy 2 indulgences and I can go murder someone and never have to worry with God because I can be forgiven in Purgatory.

No.

 

[Cougarbear]

No, that is not our doctrine. Our doctrine is that those who have not heard or cannot believe are left in the hands of a loving and merciful God. Please do not spread errors about the Catholic faith.

I just read through the history of baptism and limbo. Seems to me that recently, the Church has changed its tune about salvation for those who have not received Christ in baptism or by other sacraments. It's clear that in the medieval days that the Church clearly taught that those who die without being baptized, babies included, go to hell. Then the doctrine of Limbo came about giving some hope in purgatory that their sins could be forgiven. Then, in the 20th century, a complete turn around has taken place denouncing part of the original sin and that babies and others without baptism can still be saved. Sounds to me that with the advent of protestantism and the restoration of the Lord's Church (Joseph Smith as Prophet, seer and revelator), The Catholic Church has had to change its tune with respect to the unbaptized, including children. Seems like according to what I'm reading, the Church is saying now what we say that baptism is for the remission of sins and little to do with admittance into the Kingdom of God. The Original Sin is dying...Good riddance. Just goes to show you that the Catholic Church is trying to keep up with the Smiths. Slow down the exodus from your church. ;-)

 

[Cougarbear]

No.

That religion teacher at the Catholic Church I taught at said so. Another shift of doctrine like the infant baptism and limbo? In another question, I notice that the Catholic Church accepts baptisms from other churches as long as it is done in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost (spirit). And, there have been recent agreements of Protestant Churches and Catholic Churches in America accepting each other's baptism. I guess Priesthood authority no longer exists in the Catholic Church. It never really has in Protestantism.

 

[Meriweather]

Then the doctrine of Limbo came about giving some hope in purgatory that their sins could be forgiven.

Actually, Limbo came about because Scripture does not mention what happens in a case where a child dies before being baptized. The babies weren't in limbo--we were in the limbo of not knowing because scripture says nothing about this. Then, in time, "Limbo" began being thought of as a place. Language changes. Scripture does not. Since language changes, the Catholic Bible and Catechism are edited/updated to use current words and languages that best reflect the original meaning in both scripture and doctrine.

So, yes, if you go back to Medieval times you are likely to note language differences. Language etymology is a hobby of mine, and I find it fascinating.

 

[Cougarbear]

"Membership" doesn't begin to define baptism. In Baptism we are all part of the Body of Christ.

No, our sins are forgiven up to that point. The Sacraments taken with real intent will continue the process as we take them as remembrance of our baptismal covenants for the remission of our sins. We teach our children to partake of the Sacraments before they are baptized. They don't need it but it's good practice to teach them and also as it is passed to us, they will reach out and take it anyways. Through a separate ordinance, people are to be confirmed into the body of Christ or into his Church and then receive the Holy Ghost as a gift. Another shift you have done from the original Church Christ established.

 

[Meriweather]

That religion teacher at the Catholic Church I taught at said so.

Not at all. It was more a matter of separation of Church and State, where the Church recognizes the authority of government to perform marriages. A marriage can be recognized as a marriage without it being a sacramental marriage.

 

[Meriweather]

Another shift you have done from the original Church Christ established.

You are mistaken. We have always baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Note in the Eastern Orthodox Church, Baptism, Eucharist, and Confirmation are all done at the same time. Catholics do allow time to pass between the Sacraments. The Holy Spirit cannot be separated from any of the Sacraments. God is One. I understand those of the LDS faith believe in the separateness of God, which is why LDS baptism is not recognized in many Christian denominations.

 

[Cougarbear]

Actually, Limbo came about because Scripture does not mention what happens in a case where a child dies before being baptized. The babies weren't in limbo--we were in the limbo of not knowing because scripture says nothing about this. Then, in time, "Limbo" began being thought of as a place. Language changes. Scripture does not. Since language changes, the Catholic Bible and Catechism are edited/updated to use current words and languages that best reflect the original meaning in both scripture and doctrine.

So, yes, if you go back to Medieval times you are likely to note language differences. Language etymology is a hobby of mine, and I find it fascinating.

It's so interesting that religions of the world rely so much on language, interpretation and current political/societal influences instead of the Lord himself revealing his doctrine, commandments and secrets to his servants, the Prophets. Our Church has such a Prophet and Apostles as well. Set up as it was in Christ's time including the 70's. Also, the Priesthood after the only orders mentioned in the Bible, Aaron and Melchizedek. Same as with Moses where he had his leaders of the 12 tribes and the 70,s also. Leviticus Priesthood or after Aaron. Giving the gift of the Holy Ghost came with Christ so no Order of the Melchizedek Priesthood needed then.

 

[Cougarbear]

Not at all. It was more a matter of separation of Church and State, where the Church recognizes the authority of government to perform marriages. A marriage can be recognized as a marriage without it being a sacramental marriage.

But what about in the resurrection? What about your marriage? Sealed or damned?

 

[shimon]

Hey friend. You know better than most that I am in the right when calling out ding on his brazen idolatrous worship of a human being and teaching others to bow before a false edible trinity which amounts to murder. So, if you are going to point out Catholic practices noting their older origins why not take responsibility for the fact that the entire mass is based on first century Temple worship?

If they are wrong aren't you too? Since I already made it clear enough for anyone with a second grade education to perceive your errors who do you think you're fooling?

Doesn't Hashev want to slaughter farm animals in a new temple scam? Don't you fully support that?

Sheesh!

Oh come now Hobe these questions have been thoroughly answered in the past on this forum . I don’t know why you insist on keep bringing it up a new temple would be a platform for teaching and correcting past mistakes that have lead many astray. There are many verses in the Jewish scriptures that show this type of practise is not required plus you must take into account that ancient Israel was an agrerian society where most of the people had lots of animals that they could spare for a good community barbecue or gathering… One must keep these practises in context as to related how those past societies functioned In today’s Israel most Israelis live in high rise towers with 2 bedrooms and under a thousand sq ft none of them will be keeping a live animal or two in those places let alone a herd. In my opinion and this is just my opinion there will be an altar built in a new temple but it will be used for teaching purposes and the odd animal may be donated for a class or two afterwards everyone will sit down and eat and discuss the days events after all have you seen the current price of meat lately at this rate no one is going to be eating any and everyone will become a vegetarian…lol…Either that or they better get those three d printers in every home like microwave is where all of us no longer have to go to the grocery store….