Vatican Orders Records Withheld from Mormons

The Catholic News Service has published an article about new Vatican orders to not cooperate with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the microfilming of records. The Vatican wishes to block posthumous rebaptisms by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a practice that Catholics, Jews, and some others find objectionable.

Catholic dioceses throughout the world have been directed by the Vatican not to give information in parish registers to the Mormons' Genealogical Society of Utah.

An April 5 letter from the Vatican Congregation for Clergy, obtained by Catholic News Service in late April, asks episcopal conferences to direct all bishops to keep the Latter-day Saints from microfilming and digitizing information contained in those registers.

The order came in light of "grave reservations" expressed in a January 29 letter from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the clergy congregation's letter said.

You can read more at http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0802443.htm.

Comments

[Gloria Ishida]

As a Lutheran I also object in principle but actually, because of my denomination's beliefs, re-baptism doesn't mean a thing, especially posthumous. I have only come across one ancestor's "re-baptism" - an English Sussex gggg grandfather from the 1700's - in Seattle. It is ironic, however, that until, perhaps Vatican II, the Catholic church required the "re-baptism" of Protestant converts (living ones, of course). I know this as a fact as my Dad's family are Roman Catholic.

[Genie]

If the Catholic church doesn't recognize the validity of the LDS baptism, then what is the problem? Just sounds very controlling of the Catholic church. It's a shame they couldn't have exercised this much control over their abusive priests.

[Lois Mackin]

I respect the Vatican's concern about LDS church members potentially using microfilmed records to perform a practice that Catholics find objectionable.

However, this Vatican position begs the real question--the LDS church, by microfilming and digitizing parish register records, is preserving those records and making them available to researchers all over the world.

How does the Vatican, as the steward for these records, propose to preserve them and make them available for legitimate historical research?

[Sherri]

I sometimes go to the Mormon Genealogical Library. No one checks on my religion. They let me in to use their records freely. Why do the Catholics care about the posthumous baptism if they believe it has no effect? It makes me wonder if they are actually poised to exchange information for money...

[Diane]

Based on the excessive charges I've been quoted for seeking information regarding burials at cemeteries and other church records, it does make one wonder.

[Dae Powell]

Diane:

Huh? WHAT excessive charges have you been quoted by the LDS Church? All their information has been gathered by volunteers and offered freely. Does the Catholic Church excessively charge for access to their records? I'm confused.

Happy Dae.
http://www.ShoeStringGenealogy.com

[Oxa]

For all those who don't understand what the big deal is, it isn't just that posthumous baptism is considered "objectionable" by the Catholic Church. Per Catholic doctrine, it's heresy. Giving sacramental records to the LDS, knowing full well that they will commit heresy with them, simply facilitates a grave sin. What you're asking the pope and priests to do is compromise their principles and faith, risking the loss of salvation, simply so some hobbyist genealogists can have access to sacramental records. Sounds pretty self-centered to me.

As to record preservation, the FHL isn't the only organization capable of microfilming, digitizing, or preserving records. If the Catholic Church wants to preserve its sacramental records in that way, it will, without the FHL's help. It does have a history, after all, of preserving a large share of the great works of art from the Renaissance for all of humankind's benefit.

Bottom line-- these are private records, and they can and will do what they want with them.

[Lindsey]

The only cemetery in the area that is abandoned is an old Catholic one. The land is still owned by the Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles The 'modern' Catholic cemetery in the area is the least cooperative and usually sends out a security guard to shoo-away grave photographers.

A long time ago I realized that Catholics tend to be embarrassed by their ancestors, almost as if unconfessed sins lay hidden in the grave with them, and that genealogy can only expose dark secrets, mortal and venial, and can posthumously turn a saint into a sinner.

[Keith R. Armstrong-Bridges. CITP. MBCS]

Parish records are NOT private, they are and should be a public resource for use of any researcher.

Secrecy leads to Nazism.

[Jay]

I am responding to this because of the comments of Genie above.

I take offense to someone who says the Catholic Church couldn't control abusive priests. In the same mean-spiritedness, someone could question the Mormon's polygamist history and all of the splinter LDS branches like the compound that was recently busted in Texas where hundreds of children are abused by so called bishops. There is abuse in all religions, races & societies. This is a human problem not a religious problem.

The Catholic church microfilms its own records and is not a public institution. If they want to maintain their own records for whatever there purpose maybe no one is entitled to it. It costs money to maintain old documents and records and if charging a fee for a look up preserves the records than so be it.

I live in South Louisiana where the predominant religion is Roman Catholic. All of our Dioceses have published their sacramental records in easy to use volumes, by year, alphabetically. In one afternoon you can trace an entire family tree back to the early 1700s usually to France, Germany, Spain or Canada depending on where the family originated. There is no need to have these books on mircofilm. Anyone can purchase the books and most major genealogical libraries should have a set.

I have been to the FHL in SLC 5 times over the years, and I am very grateful for the Mormons' generosity and am truly amazed at their voluminous collection of microfilms. I am often asked by the personel or by other researchers if I am "LDS" and I simply say "no" and there is no further discussion on the matter. In other words, no one is trying to convert me over. So it's nice to that there can be friendly relations amongst people of different religions.

Most of the European church records prior to the 20th century have been microfilmed already. At least from my experience at Salt Lake there is the whole B1 Floor dedicated to European microfilms, thousands upon thousands of which are church records.

I do not think releasing current information to the LDS will hinder anyones genealogy research. Enough civil public records will exist for future generations to conduct genealogical research, and that's if the Federal & State Government don't clamp down on "Privacy laws" where one day in the future you won't even be able to look up a marriage document in a courthouse.

Those of around today are aware of the Mormon church and can join freely if we like. One of the tenets of genealogy playing so important of a role in the Mormon church, as I understand it, is that sealing names of dead ancestors in temples gives the dead the opportunity to be a part of the church that was started in the mid-1800s (in Religions, rather recently) and never heard the message of Joseph Smith.

[John McCoy]

Are church records "private records"? In modern times, this argument might hold water. However, before the advent of true civil registration, as late as the early 1900's in some parts of the US, church records were regarded by civil authorities in many places as proof of citizenship, proof of marriage, etc. When the US government wanted veterans applying for pensions to provide proof of marriage, proof of death of a previous wife, birth dates of children, etc., church records were one of the possible sources for this information. In many areas where I have research experience, church records were regarded as the equivalent of "civil registration", and in many archives, these records are actually labeled as such. Governments that recognized this fact have required these records to be deposited in civil archives in many parts of the world. While it is true that church records document various sacraments, they are also history and legal proof of events that have significance in civil law, and have been recognized as having this significance for almost as long as these records have been kept.

[Christopher Barttels]

I see that "Catholic bashing" is alive and well, even in the genealogy field. I find it disgusting.

[Leslie in Canada]

Posting by Jay says it all. Please refrain from Catholic bashing... it is every bit as nauseating as anything done and already apologised for by that denomination. I am not Catholic, but respect their faith and I think they have a right to their own material and we do not. Anything given out should be considered a privilige and we should be thankful for it. Since when do Muslims or Jews or Hindu's give out information they gathered? Would they be under such blatant attack if they witheld information because they considered it private? Think before you bash just because you can't have something for free.

[Oxa]

The significance of records has nothing to do with their ownership. The argument that Catholic Church records are public because of the uses to which they have been put is specious, at best. If that were the case, then probably every record type in the world is public because at some time or other it was used as a source of information in a government proceeding. Tell that to funeral homes, fraternal organizations, funeral homes, corporations, etc.

Governments that have required the public archiving of church records are primarily those that have had established state religions. The US has never had an established state religion.

[Ed]

I have a problem!
Is the issue that Mormons "rebaptise" previously baptised people without their knowledge? I.e.straight from some record and not in person?
If so, why would Catholics go into a quasi theological dither by arguing they are saving someones's soul by refusin a public record? It would seem to me that such a rebaptism under those conditions has no validity. It's like a foreign goverment copying my passport (say China) and making me one their citizens. Does that make me a communist ? Dear Lord, that would frighten me more than if I discovered in the hereafter I'd have to chose whether I'm Catholic or Mormon. I do believe that Jesus would judge me otherwise (like how many times I have missed turning the other cheek).

[Dennis]

The LDS church doesn’t release baptism or temple records to the public, what is the difference?

[Mariann Michaels]

Well said Jay; and thank you Christopher and Leslie. I get very tired of the constant comments made against the Catholic Church. Sorry but no religion is 100% perfect and only God will make the decision in the end of who will get into heaven. There are some genealogy records that belong to private individuals (ex. bibles and letters) and organizations (try to get records from the masons) and churches. Whether or not they are released to anyone else is solely at their discretion. Be grateful for what you do have and get on with your life and research.

[Liza]

I have to say this issue has crossed my mind many times--just what might I be subjecting my ancestors to when I share my information and research? The answer all depends on your faith and belief of course. Following the old adage "better safe than sorry", it has been my practice to NOT share my research with LDS as none of my family or ancestors are members, yet somehow some of my research has ended up there in their IGI in anyways. Obviously someone I've shared my research with has had LDS connections. This re-purposing of my research is disturbing to me. And this brings us back to the copyright issue. So what do we do? Close our research/archives as the Catholic Church is doing? Perhaps. The bottom line is it is near-impossible to control information once you release it.
And just to indicate my bias, I consider myself a spiritual athiest who, I hope, demonstrates respect for other faiths and beliefs.

[Ross]

I'm laughing on the outside while crying on the inside. Apparently small minds needs small issues to keep them busy. This is just one more example of how large groups of people are kept at each others throats in the name of religion. We could well do without any of it.

[Seth Bookey]

While I have benefited greatly from the LDS microfilming everything in sight and helping me find a variety of Jewish family records, I am offended by their repeated "baptising" of the Jewish dead. It's patently offensive, but, what can you do?

It would be great if the Vatican created its OWN repository and made it widely available. Even if they had a nominal charge, so what? At least it would be available.

There's room for more than one genealogical powerhouse in this world.

[Eileen Cook]

I also am Lutheran and what the LDS church does is not of importance to me. It means nothing. I cling to the Bible as truth and there is not one notation that I know of that commands REbaptisim. My heart is at ease.

[An innocent bystander]

Here's an interesting article by the former Harvard Dean of Divinity, Krister Stendahl, about the ancient Christian practice of baptism for the dead. After he retired he became the Lutheran Bishop of Stockholm: http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/temples/baptism_history.html

The Apostle Paul approved of baptisms for the dead according to Stendahl, but the practice was later outlawed by the Roman Catholic Church. Very interesting.

I've reviewed the article in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly. There is abundant evidence that early Christians performed baptisms for their dead family members and friends.

[Art]

Catholic Church records are not public records. They are church records that are made available to those that have a need for the information. I would imagine that most churches would charge for the information simply because they need the revenue, however small that charge may be. If you don't like a fee, that is not a church's problem - it's your problem.

[An innocent bystander]

In this YouTube Video you can listen to Lutheran Bishop Stendahl and Jewish scholars discuss LDS temples in positive terms: http://mormonvideos.blogspot.com/2008/04/mormon-temple-video-ancient-and-modern.html

[Rose]

Very interesting to hear of this ruling by the Catholic church. Then where will we get the information we seek? I tried to get information on my uncle from a local Catholic church and I was told that it was the practice of the church not to give out information on deceased members.

[An innocent bystander]

Here's another video about LDS temples for those learning about this topic.

Stendahl starts at 2 minutes 45 seconds and then at 6 minutes 15 seconds, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7om1Hs0qs54&feature=related

This entire segment of this video "Between Heaven and Earth" is fascinating.

[Liberator]

Oxa:
"Per Catholic doctrine, it's heresy."

You can put your "doctrine" (a.k.a. as DOGMA) where the Sun don't shine.
Every religion is a poor substitute for science, so who cares about your stupid dogma's? I'd rather know the TRUTH!

[Gordon Banks]

Unfortunately, the only way to keep Mormon descendants of dead Catholics from having their ancestors baptized by proxy is to keep the information away from ALL genealogical seekers. Once it is released to anyone, the Catholic Church has lost control of the information. Just forbidding the Genealogical Society of Utah from microfilming the records isn't enough. I think this means no one will be able to access the information. I hope they don't order the records destroyed altogether.

[Lynn]

My father's family arrived in New York in the early to mid 1800's. The one place that I know has information is the Catholic Church. But, getting infomation from them is an exercize in futility. They cash checks without sending the info - fail to respond to inquires for months or years - look straight at the info and say it isn't there. These have all happened to me. I tried finding my father's Baptismal record by systematically calling church after church and when I finally called the church my parents were married in and had the name of the Baptismal church - I found I had already called them twice and was told the info wasn't there. Only when I forcefully insisted that it had to be, did they actually look and there it was. This complaint has nothing to do with doctrine - I was born and raised Catholic. But, the Catholic Church has been of absolutely no use to my research. It is nothing but frustrating and aggravating.

[Anony Mouse]

Jay: Good for you!

Genie and Liberator: Take a long walk off a short pier.

[Brenda]

I am LDS, a convert, in fact, and although it makes me sad that these records are not to be made available to members of our faith, I can also understand the Catholic Church's rights and reasoning here. I don't think they are trying to be controlling; I think they are honestly doing what they think is right in the sight of God. And it is also true that we don't make our church records available to the public. I would really rather not have my medical records shared with the world either. :-) Anyway, one of our Articles of Faith (the declarations of our most basic beliefs) says that we respect the right of everyone to practice their religion as they choose.

I was the first in my family to join this church, and my family on my mother's side is very devoutly Catholic. I would very much like to use any information the Catholic Church might have, especially for marriage dates, which I'm finding are much more difficult to locate than birth and death dates. We believe that vicarious ordinances, including baptism, eternal marriage, and other temple ordinances, are essential for salvation. We believe that by researching our families and performing these ordinances for them, we are providing a service to the people who came before us who may never have had a chance to learn the gospel. That said, we also believe in the Second Coming of the Savior to the earth and that after that event we will have 1000 years not only of peace and freedom from Satan's temptations, but also of unprecedented progress in genealogy and temple work. During that time, we will be able to find information that we can't find now. I don't know if that means that other churches will choose to open their records to us or if there are other sources, but I know that this is part of the Lord's work and He will provide a way for it to be done.

By the way, we don't consider vicarious baptisms to be "rebaptizing" anyone. We just believe that we are baptizing them by the proper authority. We also believe that in the afterlife each and every person whose temple work we do has the freedom to choose whether or not to accept that work. Respect for a person's agency is one of the most important aspects of our faith.

Innocent Bystander, thank you for those links. I had never seen them before. I had especially always wondered how other faiths interpret that scripture.

Thank you guys for your respectful discussion. I enjoyed reading your comments today.

[Rosanna]

As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, may I offer my prospective to this intriguing dialog? Please bear with me for just a moment, even if you disagree. I say these things not to convert anyone, but to try to explain where we are coming from. I have often attended the temples and performed by proxy, baptisms for my ancestors. Our beliefs are that Jesus Christ came and established His church upon the earth, but after the death of the twelve apostles, with the lack of effective communication in those days, and the evil that abounded, the truth was distorted and Christ's authority was withdrawn from the earth (the Dark Ages), until Christ in His love and mercy, restored it - for all of us - through the Prophet Joseph Smith. The Book of Mormon is a 2nd witness - along with the Bible - of Jesus Christ. The Church takes all the good still left from Christ's church, and adds to it, by clarifying the misunderstandings of the doctrines lost, by bringing back revelation through a living prophet, modern scripture, and through personal revelation. Now, with the understanding that our Heavenly Father and our Savior, Jesus Christ loves all of us equally - of course he'll want everyone to have the same opportunities for this life and the next one. So He taught us the ageless principle of baptism for the dead. Those ancestors who lived worthy lives and were faithful in whatever church they believed in, but didn't have the opportunity to hear the fulness of the gospel, are now being taught in Paradise, the full truth, and ... this is the key ... they can decide for themselves what they believe and what they want to do - but the "earthly" ordinances can be performed in their behalf - they choose whether or not to accept them. My dear friends: whether Lutherin, Catholic, Jewish, Mormon, ...Christian or not ... thank you for listening.

[Dae Powell]

Eileen,

Look in the book of Acts, in the Christian bible. You'll find that several were baptized a second time.

I'm just saying...

Happy Dae.

[Al W.]

I wonder ! Would those same Catholic genealogical reocords be available to anyone other than the Mormon's ? or restricted to Mormon's only. If so, that sounds something like discrimination to me, on religious grounds. What happened to the right's and freedom's that our constitution is suposed to protect. Those other LDS names, i.e. FLDS and RLDS are in no way the same, nor are they connected any way with the Salt Lake City headquarters of the LDS faith. They, (the Prodestants) are no different than any of the breakaway groups from the Roman Catholic Church so many years ago.

[Sufferingsunfish]

Interesting discussion. If the LDS want to baptize any ancestors go to it! In my view their efforts mean nothing as I read Scripture.

However, they have a right to their beliefs and that's why USA is the greatest country in the world!!

[Leonard McCown]

Granted the Cathlic Church could microfilm and preserve their records, but you notice they are not. The LDS will do it for free and give them copies. That is the reason they have granted access before. If you want copies directly from the churches today, IF you can get them to answer, they expect payment, or offerings, which is really nominal.

Seems those records really belong to the people of those churches and their descendants.

[MHunter]

I don't know enough about Catholicism to discuss their views of the soul after death, but several of my ancestors have been "sealed" by LDS members. Frankly, I don't believe in that ritual, so it doesn't bother me. If you don't believe in the rite, why worry?

BTW, the current Pope is a dead-ringer for my grandfather, and they are/were both from the same town. What do you think of the odds?

[Lorelee]

After reading all of the blogs I have not had any of these problems. In fact In one city in the state of WA a lady I did not even know went to the church and found baptism and marriage records for all of my husbands family. In fact she was even able to use the correct forms. I have written to many churches and diocese offices with great response. Since these places are churches and pay salaries, once in awhile I have had to pay for an employee to look through microfilms for me. What makes people think they can always get things without research free?

[Alwin]

The only people the Catholic heirachry is hurting by witholding these records are Catholics who would like to access them, the little people who pay the church's bills but have no say in what it does.

[hslanham]

As an amateur genealogist, I am continuously grateful to the work that the LDS Church has done and continues to do to preserve family records around the world regardless of other religions. I have long been aware of their practice of posthumously baptizing their ancestors and sometimes mine as well.
My position has always be pragmatic:
If they are correct in their beliefs, I thank them very much.
If they are incorrect, they cannot harm us.
I am always willing to accept anyone's prayers and/or blessings for me and mine.
In the mean time, they graciously open their library doors to all and provide us with electricity, heating, air conditioning, desks, chairs, computers, copiers, microfilm, microfiche, books, and, most of all, information.

[syl mcninch]

The Mormon Church has the most extensive genealogy library in the world and it is free and open to the public. It is located in Temple Square in Salt Late City. Millions of hand written records were kept on file that were deteriorating and being lost to old age. Call it what you want, but in nearly one hundred and fifty years of work, the Mormons have obtained copies of these records and converted them to permanent computerized files which are available for public use at no cost. It seems to me that this is a very valuable service. If the Catholic Church doesn't like what the Mormons are doing, why doesn't it save the records itself, pay the cost, and let families and other interested parties have access to them?

[Ceil Wendt Jensen]

Colleagues,

I would suggest that the Catholic Church can - and has- funded microfilming
of their own records for preservation. Any archive can buy and operate a
microfilm camera and create the correct environment for preservation .

In Detroit, the Archdiocese has placed church parish records at the Detroit
Public Library/ Burton Collection. Each researcher signs a paper when they
request a microfilm- stating the surnames and parishes they are interested
in. In the past, it was at the discretion of the individual bishop to allow
microfilming- by any group. As a colleague pointed out to me"The LDS church does not allow just anyone to access their sacramental, or temple, records either. These records are set aside in special collections and one must have a recommend signed by both your bishop and stake president (local religious leaders) in order to access them.

The records are sacramental. They are not public records. They were created
for religious reasons. In many Catholic European countries the priest was
also the civil scribe. So duplicate copies are found at the civil archives.
I respect the fact I cannot enter a Mormon temple. They are welcome to enter
a Catholic Church. Different religions have diffenent rules. We just might
have to do our Roman Catholic look ups at a friendly Catholic facility instead
of our friendly LDS facility.

Perhaps a system of housing microfilms at Catholic university libraries
might be a solution. BTW, the Catholic faith also honors ancestors- on All
Souls Day and All Saints Day.
http://www.americancatholic.org/e-News/FriarJack/fj102202.asp

As I have often said during my lectures, I appreciate the GSU efforts in
preserving Catholic records. I have been able to trace my ancestors in
Poland back to the late 1600s via FHL. I volunteer each week at the local
FHC- but I do not help patrons create their Temple Ready files.

And, I know, deep in my heart, if a Mormon descendant offers my grandmother
Cecilia Marianna Wojtkowiak Przytulska - raised and educated by the Felician
Sisters- baptism, she will make the sign of the cross, say a novena to Our
Mother of Perpetual Help, and gracefully decline.

Ceil Wendt Jensen, MA, CG
http://mipolonia.net

[Carol]

The reason that LDS folks wish to baptize for the dead is that they have this belief that stems from a bible passage: Whatsoever is bound on earth shall also be bound in heaven". Sorry, but I can't recall the exact chapter and verse right now. They also believe in "sealings", such as husband to wife, parent to child, etc. They refer to those as Forever Families. If a woman does not marry, she is "sealed" to her father, a brother, and so on. This is due to their belief that on Judgment Day, it takes a MAN to release a WOMAN from the grave so she too can go to her final reward.

As to the "REbaptism" ceremony, my understanding (I've never attended one), is that young kids jump into the baptismal pool for EACH person mentioned in the ceremony. They apparently do this over and over and over again. I suppose that a private ceremony could be held, but I'm not privvy to that information.

Initially, when I heard this I was a bit taken aback, but I'm no longer in the least bothered by the LDS doing these things. As the good book says: We all see through a glass, darkly; and only God knows the end from the beginning. I'll go with that. Whatever your personal beliefs are, please DO NOT put God in a box!!!

The LDS have offered all of us family researchers a lot of pleasure over the years, so let's not be too quick to judge! For all I know, maybe that is their "reason for bein"!

[shel]

I find interesting comments referring to how research or records should be made available or "fall into the hands" of "the Mormons" or any other religious/non-religious sect for that matter. Anyone who does genealogy research is very aware that our ancestors have many descendants of all walks of life, who chose many different occupations, places to live, and religions. My ancestor may be your ancestor. We might have different lifestyles and beliefs, but does our place in society or beliefs give us any right over anyone else to the records or our ancestors? I would be ignorant to believe that I only have rights to my ancestor’s information. I hope that all records will be preserved not only in book form, but many ways in efforts to preserve them. I hope they will be made available to anyone who has the desire to research their heritage, for whatever reason that may be.

[Lalia]

The records of the Catholic Church are some of the only records available for people in Europe until 1500 AD. Thus, I am certainly in favor of them being available to researchers.

Many people today, who are of European ancestry, or partially European ancestry, had Catholic forebears, irrespective of the religion they may personally practice today. Thus those records pertain to living people's ancestry whether they are practicing Catholics or not.

I also find the idea of posthumous baptisms abhorrent--whether done by the LDS church or others. I think that a person needs to agree to baptism, and clearly those who are dead are not doing so.

Lalia

[MirtyAnne]

I find it sad that this site is becoming more and more a bashing site. All church records are private no matter what religion.

To Genie, There are 6,442,583,922 plus Catholics in the world and as far as I know we all answer to God. My only other response is judge not others lest thee be judged.

[Phyl]

Though not closely reading all the posts regarding the Roman Catholic Church and the Mormon Church I did not notice anything about my main concern regarding their re-baptisms and sealings. It is there a absolute lack of concern for accuracy. Their main concern is obviously in numbers. I have found so many errors in my ancestry it is unbelievable. An example. They now have my father’s family on line but with 10 errors which I knew off the top of my head. Including miss spelled names, wrong death dates and places, missing family members, children who were not my aunts. Incidentally the worst death date was listing someone dying in 1949 who died in 2005.

On a visit to one of largest branch Family History Libraries I couldn’t help but overhear a conversation where an elderly gentleman said that he wanted to change his grandmother’s maiden name. I had discovered that he had submitted the wrong name. The sister who he was talking to asked a few questions than said “The name is close enough.” So much for accuracy!

I question all submitted material.

We do need to be thankful for all the records they have microfilmed. Including church records. It was through such a film for the baptism record of my ggggg-grandfather, that I proved their records wrong.

[Elaine]

As a Roman Catholic genealogist I want to have access to our church records and I appreciate the work that the LDS have been doing to preserve them. Does anyone know how we can petition the folks at the Vatican to re-think their position?

[Genie]

I'm rather surprised how many people take facts and a valid criticism and construe is as "Catholic bashing". I don't know of any other religion that has a worldwide control centre like the Vatican. It's purpose is to control/lead so the church doesn't splinter/evolve? like other religions have. And thankfully the current Pope doesn't try to sweep the sexual abuses under the carpet like some on here try to by dismissing it as "bashing". It is a GOOD thing if the Vatican could use their control to prevent abuse, not something to get upset about. And back to genealogy - it is a shame that the Catholic church would withhold such important historical data regardless of their reasons.

BTW respecting religious beliefs and facing unpleasant truths are not mutually exclusive.

[JeanE]

Now that everyone has gotten their prejudices and bigotry out in the open . . .
Looks like the infamous letter sent by the Vatican was just a reiteration of one sent three years ago:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12578

As Emily Litella would say, "Never mind!"

[OAFRAME]

To All Interested Genealogists,

The spanish genealogy website El Anillo has published an open letter to the Vatican which it will be sending to the Pope asking him to reconsider and reverse this decision. The letter is written in both English and Spanish for those interested. Anyone who concurs with this document has the opportunity to add their name to it. There are also links on this page to background information on this subject if anyone would be interested in familiarizing themselves first with the topic. The website is encouraging other genealogical societies to use this letter as a "boilerplate" and mail/post it also. There is strength in numbers.

The website is www.elanillo.com/coverletter.shtml

I would also add that not all parish records are made accessible by the church even to catholic descendants, either because the parish priest, who has discretion in smaller churches, doesn't want to be bothered or they are in poor condition and should not be handled regularly. This is particlaury true in Spain. Some provinces have no records of any kind microfilmed. The problem is also that many of these records are disintgrating from neglect and improper storage over time. If they are not preserved by newer means some time soon they will be lost forever not only to genealogists but also to historians.

[Bertrand Desjardins]

The catholic parish records of Quebec offer an interesting history within this debate. The catholic priests wre obliged by law way back in the 17th century to make two copies of the baptism, marriage and death record, the second copy being turned over to the civil authorities to serve as official civil registration. The practice was continued up to the 1990s, the priest being seen as a bona fide civil registrar. The Church is of course proprietor of their own copy and has the right to limit its access to whoever they feel fit; but any restriction is useless in the present context as the second copy is of the public domain. And incidently, the Catholic Church authorites of Quebec struck a deal with the LDS church in the 1970s to microfilm the CHURCH copy of the records; by this, the Catholic church wanted to preserve the documents by limiting the use of the paper originals in the presbytaries and limiting the burden on the staff of the presbytaries of servicing the genealogists...

[John]

I think thgan an important distiction needs to be made.
-Individual Mormons with specific requests are allowed access to Catholic records.
-The Mormon Church, as an institution, is no longer allowed blanket access for mass photocopying.

[Patrcia L.]

This has been an interesting time, reading all of these views. I am a genealogist, and am very interested in the preservation of these old documents. The Mormons do a very good job with it and I would support them having access and continued preservation, as many of these documents are very old. It would cost the Catholic Church a fortune to copy all of their records. If they will not allow the Mormons access, I hope that they will step up and do it themselves, no matter the cost, because these documents are pricless.
I do think that it is funny (and I'm not Catholic bashing here--just seems funny to me) all the uproar about having choice in baptism when the Catholic Church baptizes infants who had no choice in the matter. It was decided for them by their relatives--their parents, grandparents, etc. Just strikes me as curious, how common a practice as infant baptism, is never thought of as restricting choice. The Mormon practice of baptism for the dead seems similar to me-loved ones caring for the others salvation. It just goes the other direction.

[Marna]

Interesting reading, well not a few comments, but some people may not have finished reading all the comments before adding their own. I really appreciated some of the comments/links, especially the comments of Ceil Wendt Jensen. It is interesting to see that regardless of the topic anywhere, there are some that are negative. I just thought family historians would be a little different. I have not done genealogy for long especially compared to many. I am grateful for whatever I can find, and I have had to pay for a lot of it too, including government agencies, libraries, genealogy societies, individuals, etc. I have found that even ones own extended family members are not always willing to share information or even a photo. I think any church or other private institution is entitled to keep information private. Once anything is put online by anyone it becomes public whether we want it to or not. Google your name, or anyone in your family, and found out how much is out there.

[Anne]

This ruling is absurd. As a Catholic, I aasume there is a financial angle to all of this. The Bishop of Cashel and Emly in Ireland holds the records hostage already, says they are copyrighted by him. He charges exhorbitant fees for ancestor information, even if nothing is found.

[Joy]

Dae Powell wrote
"Look in the book of Acts, in the Christian bible. You'll find that several were baptized a second time."

Dae, the first time, when John the Baptist baptized them, they weren't baptized in the name of Christ, hence the need for Paul to actually baptize them.

[Joy]

Dae Powell wrote
"Look in the book of Acts, in the Christian bible. You'll find that several were baptized a second time."

Dae, the first time, when John the Baptist baptized them, they weren't baptized in the name of Christ, hence the need for Paul to actually baptize them.

[Joy]

Dae, I posted twice by accident, not for emphasis!

[Nicolle]

Okay, I am Catholic, but, since I know NOTHING would convince some people on religious terms, maybe this might mean something:
In some parts of the world, including some more isolated part of the US, baptismal records are the only records that persons can use to legitimate their identity. Some people do not "exist on paper" in any other way. Our ancestors' identities and our identities allow us access to "more base" items like inheritance and civil rights. (On a more "ethereal" note, if we all keep looking at each other as the enemy, we will never learn how to truly love each other, our ancestors and living relatives included.)

[jcim]

I am rather new to genealogy and have not been knowledgeable about the LDS's use of genealogy research until recently. My only question is ... what if the shoe were on the other foot and other churches were comming into the LDS's records to take back their ancestors for rebaptism...Wouldn't that be interesting,,, Under the circumstances, I don't think LDS would like that......HUMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[Brad York]

Hey!, they are my ancestors too. Those of you who claim that your ancestral records are being abused by the Mormon Church, (if you know anything about the math of genealogy), must know that your ancestors just may also be mine as well. Do I not have a right to baptize MY ancestors by proxy? The more pragmatic part of you must realize that if I am wrong, then it doesn't matter. If, on the other hand, I am correct, then our common gggg grandparents and I will celebrate.

On the other hand, who amoung you that really participates in this great human project of ancestral research has not benefited by the LDS Church and its zeal to gather and preserve the records of YOUR family history?

AT any respect, we will all feel the pain of the Catholic Church's decision to disallow the Mormon's access to OUR family history.

[Kathy]

Here's a dilemma I'm caught in personally: as a member of the Mormon Church, I have repeatedly (and enthusiastically) performed posthumous baptism for a myriad of my deceased Catholic ancestors--believing with all my heart that it is the right thing to do, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY that those deceased individuals will have the choice on their own accord to accept or reject that ordinance and all that it means. I am more grateful than I can possibly express for the dedication and commitment of righteous members of the clergy who faithfully recorded sacramental and vital events in my ancestors' lives. Those records have brought my family's history to life for me.

At the same time, I have a dear cousin who's a faithful Catholic, and he was (to say the least) disturbed when he learned about our practice of performing baptisms for the dead. Our discussion was eye-opening, and I have to say I learned to understand and respect his concerns--and he understood and respected my position as well.

Here's the solution we came up with: He's promised to meet me at the gate of heaven with a vial of holy water and put in a good word with Saint Peter, just in case I need it. I promised to have him baptised posthumously, just in case HE needs it. We'll let God decide which one will be valid, but we'll have each other's back just in case.

I regret this ruling by the Vatican. The various diocese in Bavaria never HAVE allowed the LDS church to microfilm records, and as a result doing research on ancestors from Bavaria can be gruelling and costly. I hope this doesn't set genealogical research back by centuries.

[Patti]

I have read many different comments on here some I agree with and others seem to be off target. I am a Latter Day Saint and the daughter of a Catholic father and a German Lutheran (which is a break off from Catholicism) mother. That said-several points I want to make. One in regards to the polygamist sect in Texas-they are not LDS and we do not practice polygamy-yes the church did at one time (just as David and Solomon did) but at present does not. Anyone who chooses to do so is ex-communicated.
As a Latter Day Saint I have no ill will nor does anyone I know have any against the Catholic Church. I remember several years back reading in the Church News about the LDS church helping the Catholic church with the restoration of some buildings in Salt Lake City.
If the Catholic church feels the need to keep these records private that is their right and we should respect that-end of sentence. Just as we would want to be respected by others. I also agree that we should not bash any religion. We all have differences and thank goodness we live in a country where we are free to voice those differences and to choose where we want to go to worship.
If we post comments to this sight it really should be in regards to the topic and not be disrespectful to others. I too know how it is when people make deragatory comments for I have heard them for many years. However, my feeling on the matter is that it does not affect how I personally feel when someone bashes my religion. I don't base my religious beliefs on what others think or say. As stated on the cns sight the Catholic church is still going to have dialogue with the LDS church-they are not closing the door. They just have differences and as Latter Day Saints we will respect that and strive to get along as I suggest we all should do.
I was an avid genealogist before I became a LDS and still continue to be. But I feel that being disrespectful is another type of control that comes from insecurity. We should accept the decision for now and try to work around it.

[Patti]

Actually, as a Latter Day Saint for the last 30 years,I personally know that the church would not be upset if other people wanted to take their names back for baptism. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has not come out and said anything derogatory in regards to the Catholic Church's decision. We respect it-that is their right plain and simple.
We preach free agency-each person has the right to chose for themselves how they will act. We teach principles and people govern themselves.No one is forced to go to church, do genealogy, go to the temple or any other thing. It is your choice. Now back to the records it is the Catholic Church's choice to do as they wish and we are not upset over it. If in life we get upset over every little we would spend all our time angry-life's too short. The church offers what records they have to others for free. And when they copy them on microfiche-a copy is given to whomever for free. The FHC are run by volunteers most of whom are not LDS and the centers are free to everyone whether you are LDS or not. So in essence you could come and get your families names and do whatever you want to do with them.

[Neville Daniels]

The reason for the letter has everything to do with discontinued christian practise.

Those practices of The Church of Jesus Christ - to which the Apostles belonged.

The Apostle Paul sums it up in Corinthians 15:29
29 "Else what shall they do which are baptised for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptised for the dead?"

The argument is best left to the scriptures, prayer and the still small voice of The Holy Spirit that testifies to us of right and wrong.

If such a thing was right then, who are we to stop those with "The Authority of God" from acceding to the Law and The Prophets?

I rest respectfully my case.

Neville A. Daniels

[Marilynn B]

In response to the several people who find it disturbing that the LDS Church is baptising the dead who are not of the LDS faith: The church does not gather names randomly for baptism. The members submit ancestral names for temple ordinances. Obviously there will be many branches of a family leading back to a particular ancestor and none of them LDS except for the one submitting the name. The church recognizes the right of the LDS descendant to have those ordinances performed in behalf of the ancestor.

The dead have the free will to accept or reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ on the other side of the veil. Unlike sects that believe that anyone who dies without the Gospel is damned, we believe that not a single one of God's children will be lost due to ignorance of the Atonement while in the flesh. I don't expect everyone reading this to believe the same things we do---we all have a right to our own beliefs---but for the Latter-day Saints it is a divine commandment to seek our ancestors and give them the opportunity to enjoy the blessings of the Gospel. Some pertinent scriptures: Malachi 4:5-6; 1 Cor 15:29

If a pagan shaman were to say prayers over the graves of my ancestors, would I be bent out of shape? No, because although I don't share the shaman's belief, I would be touched at the charitableness of his intentions.

[Marilynn B]

When I posted my answer, I didn't intend to repeat what others said, but they didn't show up at first. Maybe my browser was just acting up...

[Sandi]

The Lord's work will not be thwarted. Jesus Christ is at the head of the LDS church and the work will go on. This is merely a flesh wound, if that.

[Jmaes E. McQuade]

Makes no sense to me. Where is the Catholic logic. If you don't believe in re-baptism after death, why are you worried about providing the historical facts of a persons life? Why does the Church bother to keep records then?

[susie]

We are ALL related, the "least" reason being because that we are all literal children of God, and we belong to each other as well as God.
The records belong to families. Our ancestors are "óurs" to claim, and one set of parents way back, will be claimed by many- of all different religions perhaps, in this day & age.
Thus worldwide genealogies converge over time.
They can't be sectioned off into religions....

I cry whenever I discover one of my own way back or close.
I receive spiritual help in research. I know I am not alone in this. If you & I receive help in our research via ENRICHING "coincidences' and 'miracles' (i.e you realize in hindsight that your own efforts were way insufficient to yield the information my ladder wa up aginst the wrong wall!!!) then that tells me that God is supporting NOT blocking reserchers efforts. HE MUST WANT this.
There is a reference in the bible (1Cor 15:29) about baptism for the dead.
Thank you to ALL church or civic bodies who make available records so I can find mine- from official CHURCH & CIVIC records, to the groups of unemployed youth in NZ sent around cemeteries to round up names, the dedicated womens groups, and individuals, the disabled who index records online, and the present day negro prisoners in the US who indexed historical bank records of their people (the bank failed...)
That's why it is so precious to me.This truly is history- not just the history of the wealthy, talented & important in life, but the unvarnished.

Lets not squabble like tick parasites on the back of an animal, about who owns the animal... this is EVERYONES territory. ( ref movie... crocodile dundee). This is bigger than all of us.

[Dave]

The Catholic church is like a private boat club or golf club..... obey the rules or your out on your butt. Theres not much christian spirit in their banning of church records. They should be moving into the 21st century instead of acting like fuddy duddys.

[Bev]

My husband and I have extensively researched our families ... the biggest roadblocks on information that we have found is through the Catholic Church. Up until the early 20th century most of my husband's family was Dutch Reform or Lutheran; we have found all kinds of information from church transcripts of marriages and baptisms. His Dad and sibs were all born between 1898 and 1916; his grandfather married a catholic woman and there the trail ends ... any information we have found since has been through family records and censuses. The church provides nothing. I agree that if the Catholic Church does not want to share this information to LDS, then they should provide an alternative so this information can be available to interested researchers ... or are they operating under the premise that we don't need to know about our ancestry??

[Samuel Weldon]

I agree no reason to bash the Catholic religon or any other religon or non religon. There has only been one perfect person born into this world and look what we done to him. We are human beings and as such we aren't perfect. Now to closing the church records, do not belive that is right, maybe if they want to with hold records of living people that might be justified. If they won't let the LDS church film the records for research perposes then they should do it. If they want to charge for the records they have them that is their business. To keep them from the public is a disservice to their own people as well as to the rest of the world. Excuse me for talking to much, have a nice day.

[Alwin]

When I wrote to a church in Pennsylvannia, they faxed my letter to a funeral home. But the record I sought was earier than that home! And so, although I know the date, I am unable to discover which cemetery in Philadelphia my great-uncle's body is buried in. That church could tell me but it refuses to.
The Catholic Church is the world's oldest dictatorship. But it wasn't always that way. St. Martin of Tours, St. Ambrose, and St. Augustine were all chosen by the public, because of their holiness and learning, to be bishops (St. Ambrose wasn't even a priest at the time of his election by the public).
The Church will, eventually, have to adapt itself to the modern - i.e. to popular education, where many Catholics are better educated than the clergy - world. But meanwhile..
I would like to know where my great-uncle is buried, but, well, given the history of U.S. records, there might not be any record of his burial at all were it not for the Church. Maybe one of my descendants will find that grave using those records one day.

[Richard Boyle]

When did religion become like private businessman’s clubs, it seems to me that religions are public in the United States that is one of the reasons the don’t pay taxes. So it should be up to the local governments who can access their records.

[Jerry De Rose]

What a lot of noise about nothing. I've had trouble getting info from most churches. I think because of the work involved. They are not set up to give info, so it is costly, in time and money. Sometimes it has seemed to be pure lazyness, found in religous groups as well as elsewhere. while I have found much info in LDS, I have found many ,many errors. As with all info, it gives one a license to search some more.

Jerry De Rose

[john J Flynn]

The church records for my church in Plainfield have been copied by the LDS but when I went there and was allowed to search the books of the church I found they kept two sets and the ones the LDS got didn't have half the info as the others. Thier is a record book from 1850 to 1855 and it has many of my relatives but is in such bad shape no one is allowed to use it. There is no money to restore it and soon all the info will be gone for good. LDS would have copied it but wasn't told about it and the early history of abt 100 famly;s will be gone ........

[maria]

It's not the fact that we catholics think the re-baptism is valid, but some people doing genealogy may believe that their relative converted to the Mormon church.I know the dead can't convert ,but for those that has died in the recent past, they may think they did convert. Not only that, but I'm sure our dead relatives may have fought and even died to keep and protect their faith. Why have it look like they lost it now. I personally belive that once a catholic, always a catholic. Even if you "Join" another church, you are still Catholic. You are just a non-practicing catholic.It's a lot like race to me. whatever my color or sex I will be that till I die, and so it is with being a Catholic.

[ForThis Cause]

Whew, how quickly things can change colors! We have made full circle discussing the doctrines of the Catholic and Morman religions. I have enjoyed most of them, however, I have just one point to make. To those individuals who posted and used scripture references to support their statements, please, please, remember - Do NOT use Scripture out of context. In reference to Paul's letter to the Church at Corinth, please go back, to at least, the beginning of Chapter 15 to understand exactly what the Apostle was trying to say to the Church. And, to the poster who referenced Lutheran Bishop Stendahl and made this statement, "The Apostle Paul approved of baptisms for the dead according to Stendahl, but the practice was later outlawed by the Roman Catholic Church.", please provide me scripture passages from where you derived this belief. You must remember the Apostle Paul's concept of being whatever it takes to win lost souls. Just because he did not attack this practice openly, does not prove he accepted it. Remember, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do." Paul stated several times he would be anything if it meant he would save one for Christ.
ForThisCause

[ForThis Cause]

Whew, how quickly things can change colors! We have made full circle discussing the doctrines of the Catholic and Morman religions. I have enjoyed most of them, however, I have just one point to make. To those individuals who posted and used scripture references to support their statements, please, please, remember - Do NOT use Scripture out of context. In reference to Paul's letter to the Church at Corinth, please go back, to at least, the beginning of Chapter 15 to understand exactly what the Apostle was trying to say to the Church. And, to the poster who referenced Lutheran Bishop Stendahl and made this statement, "The Apostle Paul approved of baptisms for the dead according to Stendahl, but the practice was later outlawed by the Roman Catholic Church.", please provide me scripture passages from where you derived this belief. You must remember the Apostle Paul's concept of being whatever it takes to win lost souls. Just because he did not attack this practice openly, does not prove he accepted it. Remember, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do." Paul stated several times he would be anything if it meant he would save one for Christ.
ForThisCause

[Kathy]

I do not belong to the LDS church but I am ever greatful for the use of their records. I am Catholic and all my grandparents came from Italy and all the genealogy information I need is in that country. I have been able to learn about my ancestors on my mothers side of the family because all the church records were microfilmed by the LDS. However, on my fathers side of the family they were not. With this new ruling I will never learn about my fathers side of the family because the records have not been microfilmed. I note some comments say we can pay for the services. That is not easy and very expensive to do when you are dealing with a foreign country. I have asked friends who went to Italy to get some of the information I needed. They tried to do this but the priest at the church was almost never there and when he was he had no time to look up the records. In other cases I was told that you had to show a lot of money to get the priest to look up anything. Also it was mentioned that the church would take care of the records which is not true. Some of the priests don't want to look at the records because of their condition which is not good. So the Catholic Church has closed the door on my knowing anything about my fathers side of the family. Lastly, my understanding was that several years ago the LSD church announced that it would no longer baptist non-members. So this new ruling seems totally unnecessary.

[Kathy]

I do not belong to the LDS church but I am ever greatful for the use of their records. I am Catholic and all my grandparents came from Italy and all the genealogy information I need is in that country. I have been able to learn about my ancestors on my mothers side of the family because all the church records were microfilmed by the LDS. However, on my fathers side of the family they were not. With this new ruling I will never learn about my fathers side of the family because the records have not been microfilmed. I note some comments say we can pay for the services. That is not easy and very expensive to do when you are dealing with a foreign country. I have asked friends who went to Italy to get some of the information I needed. They tried to do this but the priest at the church was almost never there and when he was he had no time to look up the records. In other cases I was told that you had to show a lot of money to get the priest to look up anything. Also it was mentioned that the church would take care of the records which is not true. Some of the priests don't want to look at the records because of their condition which is not good. So the Catholic Church has closed the door on my knowing anything about my fathers side of the family. Lastly, my understanding was that several years ago the LSD church announced that it would no longer baptist non-members. So this new ruling seems totally unnecessary.

[Dale]

Gee, nice to see those who resent "Catholic bashing" have nothing against bashing the Freemasons. So much for tolerance.

The difficulty with getting information from "the Masons" is that we don't have what most of you want. At most, Masonic records could possibly show someone you want to know about lived in a given area, at a given time.

But since nothing we collect is genealogical in nature, there is NO WAY that the fact that a "William Bennett" went through the degrees of Freemasonry in a certain Lodge on such and such dates is of much use to the genealogist, since there is no way to distinguish him from the thousands of "William Bennetts" around, including MANY others who may have also been Freemasons.
And since the records of many Lodges have been destroyed by fire, flood, termites, etc, even what information we may have once had, may not exist any more.

Usually, if you know that a particular ancestor was a member of a particular Lodge, and IF that Lodge still exists and IF its records are intact, the Secretary will likely make available such information as we have to the family, but it is unlikely to advance your Family History beyond a perhaps interesting bit of trivia about a particular person in your family tree.

But since we don't have a huge central Library of all this information, and paid specialists to access it for you, you complain that we are not forthcoming with information. We have no birth, marriage, and death records for the most part, which is what most genealogists are looking for.

I am both a genealogist and also a 40+ year Mason and Past Master of my Lodge. But on just a "hunch" from someone I don't know, I will not volunteer to go through 80 years of handwritten records of my Lodge, to see if somebody named "William Bennett" was once a member. If you have evidence that your William Bennett was once a member of my Lodge, in a certain time frame, I might give it a go and see what I can find.

On the theological side, since everyone not a Catholic is already a Heretic, by definition, how they would facilitate Heresy by giving access to their records for copying is yet another "mystery" they guard, I guess. Do they expect all the Mormons to convert to Catholicism because they can't get access to those Catholic Parish records?

[Ernest]

A couple of points not mentioned so far.

For many centuries in the middle ages the records kept by various churches in many countries were actually being kept on behalf of the government of the day and the church got a lot of benefits for doing so. That's why many of the older ecords have always been seen as public reocrds. All birth, death, and marriage records are public records and recognised as such by the various governments world wide. Baptismal records are a separate issue and can be seen as private records.

It'll also be interesting how this decision is received by various law courts as it's in violation of the discrimination laws as it shows religious discrimination as it's aimed at only one church group.

The LDS policy is a descendant may request a baptism of a blood ancestor after proving the linkage, but no one else can request the baptism. So any such request would be from a blood relative.

Anyway, if the LDS are wrong, this would have no effect on anyone as it's done without their personal knowledge. If the LDS is right, then the Vatican attitude is wrong.

I just ask - Where has Christ's attitude of helping others gone in this issue?

[Beverly Uhren]

If the Catholic Church is using the baptism issue to initiate a dialogue with the Mormon Church I think that's a very good thing. As a Catholic convert I know from experience the reason the Church does conditional baptisms is to make certain the person is baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Not all churches baptize in this way because many churches do not believe in a Trinitarian God. I also do genealogy research and have always wondered how a dead person can be bapatized. The Catholic Church teaches one must desire baptism.