Hitler Baptized

[Del March]

Del March's post about forgiveness as it relates to her grandfather was wonderful. Thank you.

You're welcome

Honestly, I'm always so sad when I see people holding on to their grudges or past hurts. I wish those people could discover the power of forgiveness like I have. Forgiveness cannot erase all things, in my case it cannot erase all of the emotional scars, but the extent of what it CAN do is amazing nonetheless. I am no longer feeling all the rage, all the hurt, all the shame, all the guilt, all those horrendous feelings I used to feel, and that feels GREAT! Sure, I keep discovering new areas in which my past abuse creates problems (like when I got pregnant for example), but at the same time I am able to master more and more problems, and to feel more and more free of what happened to me. I am able to compensate, as a free agent, for what happened to me as a victim, because forgiving released me from my position as the victim.

By surrendering the judgement to God, I have freed myself of any obligation to remember the abuse, and thus I can allow it to become more and more distant in my memory, less and less present in my actual life.

Forgiveness is a gift that we make to ourselves, not to the offenders! Anyone who thinks that the benefit of forgiveness goes to the offenders doesn't understand anything to true forgiveness.

Del

[urroner]

Does forgiving equate to forgetting? I don't think so. Just because I can forgive somebody of an evil deed doesn't mean that I forget that evil deed.

Besides, what is the purpose of forgiving? I think that forgiving is giving me the chance to let go of anger and hatred and moving on with my life. (See Del March's previous post.)

[Mark Beesley]

Del March wrote:

Forgiveness is a gift that we make to ourselves, not to the offenders! Anyone who thinks that the benefit of forgiveness goes to the offenders doesn't understand anything to true forgiveness.

Amen!!! Amen!!! and Amen!!!

[Observer]

Del March wrote:

Forgiveness is a gift that we make to ourselves, not to the offenders! Anyone who thinks that the benefit of forgiveness goes to the offenders doesn't understand anything to true forgiveness.

Amen!!! Amen!!! and Amen!!!

A truly reasonable and respectable position for an abused victim to take.

For society in general to take this same stance would be unconscionable. It is the obligation of society to punish heinous criminals and hold them to account - the main goal of society in general should not be to "let it go" in the interest of ridding themselves of sour feelings. If 3rd party observers and society in general considers only the goal of "joy and peace" by "forgiving" society's most heinous offenders, the offenders can all breathe a collective sigh of relief.

Molested children may grow to forgive their abusers (hopefully gain control of their life and move on in a healthy, productive manner). I, as an uninvolved observer in society will make no similar effort to "forgive" child rapists or to 'move on'. For me to do so would be so irresponsible and just plain lazy.

So many lines have been used in this thread. "...just don't care...", "...wash our hands clean...", etc. It seems the real goal is not always obedience to God, but rationalizations for inaction where action (at least condemnation) is warranted and even required for a clean conscience.

[Proverbs]

Lets stick with Baptism for the dead here please. Observer you are misrepresenting what I wrote too.

When I said I do not care. That means I do not care how God judges Hitler. He's my King why should I counsel him? It makes no sense. I let him be the judge and do as I am asked. For you to try to imply I do not care if people do evil things is ludicrous. All you have done in this thread is try to make fun of LDS beliefs quit please try to have a decent discussion if that isn't to much to ask.

Paul please address my post when you have a chance I want to hear how your "wisdom" is above all the Prophets and scripture I quoted.

You need to remember just because we do the vicarious work, and just because everyone will bow and confess Jesus is the Christ does not mean that some (like possibly hitler) will not still choose not to serve him. There is a big difference between knowing Jesus is the Christ and confessing it and serving him. Even the devils know he is the Christ and fear him. The sons of perdition will confess it but even if the work is done will be given no glory. It is up to God not Paul to be making these choices.

I know I know you can't wait until you get God status I've heard you thump your own chest in other threads about exaltation. I can careless man. You are just another saint like the rest of us.

[Pahoran]

In October 1998, McAreavy was able to obtain copies of LDS temple ordinance records for Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun from Philip Roberts of the North American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. These IGI (International Genealogical Index) copies reveal that Adolf Hitler was "baptized" and "endowed" on December 10, 1993, and "sealed" to his parents on March 12, 1994. These events took place in the London Temple, England. Robert's copies also show that Hitler was "sealed" to Braun on September 28, 1993, in the Jordan River Temple, Utah, and on June 14, 1994, in the Los Angeles Temple. Roberts sent copies of these records to Ashton.

As I said, I could look at it either way. I personally could not imagine submitting those names.

Thank you for this, Dimbulb.

Question for anyone who knows: why is this any business of "the North American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention?" Why should they care?

Could it be that they aren't really anxiously engaged in preaching the Gospel (as they understand it) that they have time to go around "digging up the dirt" on us?

And is it really "dirt?" It makes for nice sensationalistic tabloid headlines, I suppose; but there is a strange inconsistency here. This was evident in an anti-Mormon book called The Counterfeit Gospel of Mormonism which ringingly proclaimed that no sinner is beyond the reach of God's grace, and then, in the very same chapter, heaped scorn and ridicule on us because someone did Hitler's Temple work.

I doubt very much that these religious voyeurs have actually thought anything through.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Del March]

That said, I myself (as an uninvolved 3rd party) am not "made whole" and no "peace and joy" is brought upon me as I "forgive" or let go of any "resentment" I have for child rapists, murderers and abusers. It does NOT serve me (or society in general) to seek "peace and joy" regarding heinous criminals.

No, you can't find any of those good feelings, because you shouldn't have anything to forgive to start with! You said it yourself: you are an UNINVOLVED third party, so what gives you the right to react as a victim??

In those cases, society must seek justice (as a consequence) and punishment (also as a deterrent).

Did any LDS on this thread ever say otherwise?? YOU are the one who accused us of mixing up forgiveness with non-punishment, but we do no such thing.

However, does this mean that if a small child (while still a small child) "forgives" or otherwise comes to terms with their heinous abuser that I (or society in general) should heel and seek no further justice or punishment for the offender?

If you understood the concept of repentance a la LDS, you would know that we believe that enduring the legal punishment for a crime makes it much easier to fully repent. So even our love for our criminal brothers and sisters actually encourages us to have them prosecuted for their crimes!

We also believe that we must sustain our governments and our laws, and we believe that we must support laws that encourage a decent and moral behaviour, which of course includes punitive laws.

Just because I forgave my grandfather doesn't mean I wouldn't have had him tried by a court if I had had the opportunity to do so. It also doesn't mean that I would have left him alone with my kids (he died before I had any), at least not before he had shown a deep remorse and gone through all the steps of a true repentance.

What you don't seem to understand is that we don't wait until a person repents before we forgive them. When Jesus told us to forgive all men, He didn't add a caveat that said "all men who have repented".

And this logically leads to performing all the ordinances of salvation for men BEFORE they have shown that they are worthy of receiving them. We do NOT wait until a dead person has demonstrated a desire and a worthiness to be baptised, endowed and sealed. We do it as soon as we can because our duty is to forgive them, and to serve them. Period. It is then up to God and to themselves to determine whether and when those ordinances that we did for them will have any value. THEY judge, we don't.

Del

Edited because "criminal brethren" didn't exactly convey what I really meant...

[reliks]

just becuase he was baptized by proxy does not mean he accepted the ordinance. We did it in case he does accept the gospel. who are we to hold it against him if God himself will forgive him?

[koakaipo]

Regarding forgiveness for Hitler-eh, it's not my place to offer any . That's between the people he wronged and himself and himself and God. What I do has no effect either way, so I can't offer anything to the guy. So, I the subject of forgiveness on this matter is sorta not the point. Offering his name in an ordinance isn't forgiveness really or not offering isn't lack of forgiveness either.

I already mentioned like in the first five quotes that:

1) Ordinances need to be performed for everyone

2) I think theologically, we understand some will be ressurected before others. Those who have done big boo boos will have to wait. so, theologically, we do talk about order, if not exclusivity.

3)With that logic it's understandable why some are saying hey, maybe we can offer up other names first.

4) NOT just because we don't like Hitler either, but why Hitler first at all? Just cause he's famous enough that he has name recognition? Does celebrity even get religious perks? I mean, that's the one question I ask.

5) As I mentioned in the first 10 posts, the only reason it really makes sense to have his name on the list is if we have a family member who did the work. Otherwise, yeah, it's sorta odd. Not cause again, he doesn't deserve those ordinances, but regarding why his name popped into the mind at all.

EDIT: I just started actually going over some more posts and came upon Del march's post on forgiveness though. And I do think it's very beautiful and true in it's content. What I said earlier regarding to forgiveness was not in relation to her points, but the point about when it's our place to offer forgiveness in the first place to someone who has wrong not us but others.

[GravyBoat]

There is a listing for Hitler in the PRF, but not in the IGI.

I'll admit that I'm not familiar with the acronyms listed.

And what's wrong with someone (the someone(s) who did AH's proxy work) having faith that G-d's grace is so profound that even someone as depraved as AH has hope of a Kingdom of Glory?

Yeah, he probably does deserve some place in the Kingdom of God...as long as it's below ALL OF THE JEWS HE MURDERED.

Gravy, I find it strange that you have such strong feelings about Adolph Hitler's murders, and yet use a picture of a fellow murderer, Che Guevara, as your avatar.

Are you unaware of this man's life (not the Hollywood version, mind you.)

Yeah, I'm very aware. He was a murdering communist like the rest of them.

Will Che go to hell for who he's killed? Most likely. I use Che since he's a symbol of socialism as well as communism, and I consider myself open to socialistic government.

Cute, though: hard-core liberals are more likely to worship an atheist mass-murderer than a devout mass murderer (Hitler).

[reliks]

[ave maria]

Since his name does not appear in the IGI, it means his name was not submitted for ordinance work. He was not baptized.

Actually, those IGI records have been available online for some time.

My guess is that at some point in the past few years they were simply deleted.

The person who's generally most involved in all this brouhaha about who is or isn't subject to posthumous LDS ordinances is genealogist Helen Radkey. All this is generally tied up in the Jewish-LDS proxy baptism controversy, where a number of Holocaust victims' names were eventually deleted from the IGI. It wouldn't be that difficult to imagine that the names of Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun were likewise deleted due to controversy.

http://www.jewishgen.org/InfoFiles/ldsagree.html

That the work was never in fact done would be difficult to prove, with IGI evidence to the contrary having once been available, and then not.

[koakaipo]

One question-why IS forgiveness a part of the conversation regarding doing ordinances for everyone, even people who really suck? Does anyone really believe we can actually be in the position to "forgive" Hitler? Just because we are mad at him or not mad at him has no beaing at all really on the actual process of repentence and forgiveness. It's like if someone fender benders you, you have a witness who stops, and offers forgiveness to the the fender benderer. Why would his forgiveness matter at all? It doesn't.

How easy is that to do when we are not involved to the nth degree? Can't it simply be more about the process at hand with such ordinances, that they are to be done for everyone, even jerks and murderers? I just don't think forgiveness should be associated with baptisms for the dead-it's giving more weight to our role I think as the "doers" of ordinances, when in reality we are just following orders.

Now jsut cause someone decides they'll pass on Dahmer or Hitler or whoever, doesn't meant they are being unforgiving. They just have a bunch of names to choose from, and I don't see any problem with them picking other names to offer instead. I personally never thought that putting Hitler for a name was on the "to do" list, and I don't feel guilty about that.

[Zakuska]

How many million have died infront of the Swords and BBQ pits of Chrisitianity?

Should we give it another chance?

[ave maria]

This might also be helpful, from The Salt Lake Tribune:

Four years after the LDS Church agreed to stop posthumous baptisms for Jewish Holocaust victims, perhaps the best-known of death camp martyrs -- Anne Frank and members of her family -- continue to pop up in Mormon temple and genealogical records.

Further, the records show temple work has also been done vicariously for the Holocaust's chief perpetrator, Adolf Hitler, and many of his Nazi henchmen.

Church officials acknowledge the renegade records are thorns in the flesh, but they insist they have done their best to honor their 1995 agreement to keep Holocaust victims out of temple rites -- and to eradicate records for "fictitious or inappropriate" figures, like Hitler, when they are discovered.

It took only seconds recently to retrieve Der Fuehrer's record -- and that of wife Eva Braun -- from the LDS Church's Ancestral File via the FamilySearch Internet site ( www.familysearch.org ). The records also listed two men as having provided the most recent of recurring Hitler-Braun files.

One, a Salt Lake City man, insisted he had neither submitted nor done proxy temple work for Hitler and Braun, and that his name was being used by someone else. The second man, however, acknowledged having been baptized for Hitler and several of his lieutenants -- among them Martin Bormann, Heinrich Himmler, Reinhardt Heydrich and Joseph Goebbels -- in the Los Angeles Temple.

"I firmly believe [Hitler] will be in Outer Darkness [the Mormon equivalent of hell]," said the man, a longtime LDS Church member who agreed to talk only on condition of anonymity. "But I'm not the judge."

The man said any doubts he had about the submissions eased when, riding up a temple elevator, he saw a plaque containing a quotation from the church's canonical Doctrine and Covenants: "I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men."

Apparently, that decision has already been made in the case of Hitler and his minions. While their names may still pop up, periodically submitted by diehard genealogists, Purdy said any temple work done for them is for naught.

Recognizing their crimes against humanity, particularly Holocaust victims, submissions for Nazi leaders are deemed inappropriate to a rite originated out of members' love for, and desire to perform sacred temple rites for, their ancestral dead.

"Policy is to remove them as soon as possible. Moreover, in the case of the names in question, Hitler, Eichmann, etc., the temple ordinance work for these individuals has already been nullified," Purdy said. (emphasis mine)

from Bob Mims, "LDS Struggle to Keep Proxy Baptisms Appropriate," The Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 9, 1999, p. C1

http://www.sltrib.com/1999/oct/10091999/religion/35861.htm

see also:

http://www.millennialstar.org/index.php/2005/04/08/p595

[Del March]

One question-why IS forgiveness a part of the conversation regarding doing ordinances for everyone, even people who really suck?

...

Can't it simply be more about the process at hand with such ordinances, that they are to be done for everyone, even jerks and murderers? I just don't think forgiveness should be associated with baptisms for the dead-it's giving more weight to our role I think as the "doers" of ordinances, when in reality we are just following orders.

Agreed

When it comes to people we know and who have offended us, then yes, forgiveness and temple ordinances by proxy can be related.

But when it comes to people who have not offended us personally, I don't understand why the matter of forgiveness should come up at all.

After all, we do not know whether our ancestors for whom we do temple work were not horrendous murderers, or pedophiles, or whatever. I personally don't fool myself into thinking that most of my ancestors were adorable sweet people. Chances are that most of them were probably in the range going from pretty good to quite bad, with a few hitting on very good, but there are bound to have been a few awful ones in the lot too. So what? I have to do the job for them anyway, it's my duty to God.

Del

[GravyBoat]

I guess my opinion boils down to Hitler shouldn't have been baptized, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it. If Paul wishes to protest further, I wish him well--he has a good point.

As far as my left-leaning ideals go, kawikadave and reliks, I'll gladly share my room in hell with a large portion of Europe.

I'm no communist; however, I think that the American economy needs to be reexamined. Now can we stay on topic?

[Pahoran]

Cute, though: hard-core liberals are more likely to worship an atheist mass-murderer than a devout mass murderer (Hitler).

Hitler wasn't at all devout. He was a lapsed Catholic, didn't go to church, had some vaguely superstitious ideas about "providence," made occasional religious references in his speeches (as did Stalin, post-June 1941) but he was pretty much an atheist.

Del,

you wrote:

But when it comes to people who have not offended us personally, I don't understand why the matter of forgiveness should come up at all.

I absolutely agree. I think it very presumptuous when some person A ostentatiously and publicly "forgives" person B for harming person or group C.

Regards,

Pahoran

[USU78]

Observer:  You really need an explanation? Ok. Del initially objected to my sour resentment and refusal to "forgive" a person - even if that person is Adolph Hitler (citing the reasonable reasons forgiveness should be the answer).

Yes I do need an explanation. We LDS are chiming in on the subject of forgiveness in the next world, not this one. We are not asserting rolling over and showing our bellies to the evil aggressor. That is an item for another day and another thread. Proxy temple work is all about G-d's forgiveness, which is beyond what we can imagine, being earthy and judgmental ourselves. You have never tied the issue of punishment in this world to forgiveness by G-d in the next and shown it to be in any way inconsistent.

Observer:  Refusal to simply "forgive" a person such as Adolph Hitler plays a key role when posters such as myself, Paul and others have a problem with temple work being performed for Adolph Hitler. So yes, the whole discussion of forgiveness of heinous criminals directly applies to this thread.

But why should it? It isn't us doing the forgiving or condemning: it's the Big Guy Himself. We merely do His work, little as our contributions may be, and (hopefully) learn thereby a little more about Him in the process.

Getting your panties in a wad over our practices and beliefs in this regard is hardly worth the calories, IMHO.

[Proverbs]

I continue to notice all objections to doing the names of some individuals is simply "opinions" that does not seem to be reconciled with scripture and the words of our modern Prophets. Would someone who objects enough to call vicarious work for these people "Evil" please step up and show us scriptural referenceto support your position.

Right now we are just hearing you hem and haw about how unrighteous it is to do what God asked us to do without providing any scriptural basis for your objections.

I am waiting thanks.

[koakaipo]

Ave Maria-Interesting read then-so it was nullified then? That's very, very interesting.

[grego]

according to what we know more and more, hitler is hardly the man many would hope to portray him as. the revisionists have lots of very solid evidence to paint a very different hitler and war. if churchill, roosevelt, and others can be baptized, why not hitler? who is so absolutely sure of his "crimes" and their reasons, they would be willing to put their own exaltation and salvation on their judgment of him?

[thesometimesaint]

grego:

While I'm not willing to judge the Eternity of Hilter. I am very well aware his actions while he was here on earth. He was every bit as evil as my history books say he was. He was reponsible for the torture MURDER of 20+ million people.

[grego]

how do you know? why are you so sure?

[koakaipo]

The guy left alot of very hard evidence behind in terms of his "crimes....." What revisionists are you a-talkin' about?