Baptisms For The Dead

[Mormon Factor]

From the story found Here.

I know there has been the ongoing battle from the Jewish community and the church about doing proxy work for Holocaust victims. In the article above it states that even Catholic Dioceses worldwide were told NOT to allow Mormons to have the names of their members.

My question is, what's the big deal? If they don't believe the LDS baptism really has any merit/ effect, who cares if someone is dunked in the name of someone from another religion? Maybe I am just more laid back about it (which is why I am interested in your thoughts), but if some other religion got a hold of my name after I died and baptised me by proxy into their religion, I wouldn't care. Sure, partly because I would be dead , but my knowledge of the gospel is such that I know no other baptism other than one done with the priesthood authority matters anyway.

Does the outrage from non-LDS about proxy baptisms mean that, in reality, they actually DO believe there is some validity to a LDS baptism? If a LDS baptism is not recognized and of no value/ efficacy in THEIR eyes, why even worry about it?

[Ray Callis Hatton III]

They care, because we care, and they stop us because they can, via they claim the names of their dead are their property.

They may think the Baptism is detrimental, like we're a bunch of Satanist, saying curses to get them into "Mormon Heaven" which is, of course, hell...

[Hoops22]

[

They care,

I'm not sure if I do or not.

because we care,

But that's not why.

and they stop us because they can,

Seems to be still going on.

via they claim the names of their dead are their property.

While I agree there is power in names, this is not the reason. I can understand why a christian would not want a family member to be baptized by ANY group that they claim is not christian. I don't see why that's so terrible.

They may think the Baptism is detrimental,

For the dead, yeah, they might.

like we're a bunch of Satanist,

Your hyperbole does not add much to your argument. Even if I could find it.

saying curses to get them into "Mormon Heaven" which is, of course, hell...

ditto

[annewandering]

while i, as lds, know that their fears are unfounded, they dont. not sure they want to know they are unfounded either.

what bothers me the most about this is that it comes on the heels of the gay rights people calling the church and members bigoted. two days after the election, out of the blue they say they have dropped all talks with the mormons. odd.

perhaps they have been convinced we really are lying and are bigoted. i just dont understand why they did this out of the blue in a press conference, saying they had not had talks recently with lds officials yet they had just finished a meeting with lds officials very recently. very confusing.

[kawikadave]

Maybe we could calm their fears by telling them that no only do we do baptisms for the dead, we also ordain males to the priesthood, perform washings and anointings, help them receive their endownments, and seal them to their spouses.

It's not just baptism.

[bluebell]

They care about baptism for the dead because they don't understand what it is. They see it as us trying to score points by using their loved ones' names (one lady actually told me that we put these people's names on our roles at church to add to our membership numbers) or us taking away the free will of 'easy' victims (deceased people).

The are incapable, for whatever reason, of seeing sincere motives and love behind our actions.

[Avatar4321]

Because they fear we are right and actually converting people to the Church in the next life.

[Hoops22]

Because they fear we are right and actually converting people to the Church in the next life.

Perhaps, they fear you are wrong.

The are incapable, for whatever reason, of seeing sincere motives and love behind our actions.

Incapable? Perhaps it is this brand of arrogance that turns people off.

[abqfriend]

"I am a Catholic and my Church recently came out and said they will not release baptismal or death records to any outside group.

I support such a decision. It is about having respect for another's religious beliefs. "

Thge Catholic Church and any church or religion has the right to limit their church/synagogue/parish records in any way they deem appropriate.

Here is a Link:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0802443.htm

"The Catholic Church will eventually open a dialogue with the Mormons about the rebaptism issue, Father Massa said, "but we are at the beginning of the beginning of a new relationship with the LDS. The first step in any dialogue is to establish trust and to seek friendship."

Speaking for myself as a practicing devout Catholic-I wish my Church records shared with no one after my death. I also wish no re-baptism or similar given in proxy to me by some future relative of mine.

-Carol

From the story found Here.

I know there has been the ongoing battle from the Jewish community and the church about doing proxy work for Holocaust victims. In the article above it states that even Catholic Dioceses worldwide were told NOT to allow Mormons to have the names of their members.

My question is, what's the big deal? If they don't believe the LDS baptism really has any merit/ effect, who cares if someone is dunked in the name of someone from another religion? Maybe I am just more laid back about it (which is why I am interested in your thoughts), but if some other religion got a hold of my name after I died and baptised me by proxy into their religion, I wouldn't care. Sure, partly because I would be dead , but my knowledge of the gospel is such that I know no other baptism other than one done with the priesthood authority matters anyway.

Does the outrage from non-LDS about proxy baptisms mean that, in reality, they actually DO believe there is some validity to a LDS baptism? If a LDS baptism is not recognized and of no value/ efficacy in THEIR eyes, why even worry about it?

[Avatar4321]

Perhaps, they fear you are wrong.Incapable? Perhaps it is this brand of arrogance that turns people off.

If we are wrong we have no authority and our baptisms are of no consequences to anyone.

[Thinking]

My question is, what's the big deal? If they don't believe the LDS baptism really has any merit/ effect, who cares if someone is dunked in the name of someone from another religion?

Classic response from the offending party.

Since you don't understand why your actions are offensive, you don't think you should have to stop.

[John Larsen]

I think some of the offense come from the implied hubris of suggesting that everything the deceased person did in life in terms of religion--their faith, sacrifice, devotion, commitment and integrity do not matter so much as the ordinance act. It seems overly legalistic and implies in a very real way that the Church is right and everyone else is wrong. Being told such a thing, even symbolically, can be taken as offensive.

Additionally, many people hold their own religion to be very dear, personal and sacred. There is a perception among many that by performing these rites for deceased loved ones crosses this boundary. To suggest that it is no big deal because they don't believe anyway, misses this point.

[John Larsen]

If we are wrong we have no authority and our baptisms are of no consequences to anyone.

But that is just it, the actions do have emotional consequences for others. You just don't think they should.

[Mormon Factor]

If we are wrong we have no authority and our baptisms are of no consequences to anyone.

That's what I was thinking. To be so against the idea of LDS doing baptisms for the dead one must have some belief (conscience or subconscience) that LDS baptisms have SOME validity.

What's interesting is Catholics, for example, don't recognize LDS baptisms as valid (even thought they will recognize other religion's baptisms as valid), yet they too are against the practice of LDS baptising on behalf of deceased catholics. If it isn't valid who cares?

[Garden Girl]

I'm more able to understand the Jewish objection more than other faiths... with the Jewish people, there is a whole "tradition" and identity as a people all roled into their faith.

But I also have understanding of other Christians as well... particularly if they were strong in their denomination...

I don't look at it so much as baptizing them into the "Mormon Church" per se, but, rather, as performing "ordinances" with proper priesthood authority that have been revealed in these latter days... for instance the sealing of families to me is one of the greatest of blessings... others may not see the need, etc.

I know many ward members with non-member families who help them with research on family lines because though they may not believe, they see no harm and actually like the concept... and if it isn't true, what does it matter...

Garden Girl

[abqfriend]

Catholics do not recognize LDS baptisms as valid -and -equally-LDS do not recognize Catholic baptisms as valid.

As a Catholic-I care-it is ultimately about respecting another's religious values.

I see such an issue as showing disrespect toward my religious values and beliefs.

The the issue is about respecting another's religious values-however in-error you may feel those values are.

-Carol

That's what I was thinking. To be so against the idea of LDS doing baptisms for the dead one must have some belief (conscience or subconscience) that LDS baptisms have SOME validity.

What's interesting is Catholics, for example, don't recognize LDS baptisms as valid (even thought they will recognize other religion's baptisms as valid), yet they too are against the practice of LDS baptising on behalf of deceased catholics. If it isn't valid who cares?

[Mormon Factor]

Catholics do not recognize LDS baptisms as valid -and -equally-LDS do not recognize Catholic baptisms as valid.

As a Catholic-I care-it is ultimately about respecting another's religious values.

I see such an issue as showing disrespect toward my religious values and beliefs.

The the issue is about respecting another's religious values-however in-error you may feel those values are.

-Carol

One of the LDS top 3 religious values is to "Redeem the Dead". Aren't you not respecting the religious values of the LDS, however in error you feel those values are, by actively trying to surpress the names of deceased non-LDS?

Does that make sense?

[Mudcat]

That's what I was thinking. To be so against the idea of LDS doing baptisms for the dead one must have some belief (conscience or subconscience) that LDS baptisms have SOME validity.

I have had mixed thoughts on this subject and it doesn't make me feel comfortable, however I have come to grips with the fact that most likely an LDS will be baptized for me after I am dead, regardless of my wishes.

I wouldn't qualify your thought, by saying a repulsion towards the concept of proxy baptism makes it valid.

From an external perspective it seems necromantic on some level. It is also a slap in the face to a persons mortal beliefs.

I know of a very devout Baptist woman, who after her death and against her mortal wish, was given a proxy baptism by her daughter.

I have always found that to be offensive. It was like saying, "Sorry Mom, what you believed wasn't good enough."

This lady's daughter loves her mother, that is why she did it. However, the underlying sentiment is that what her mother believed wasn't good enough. Regardless of intent, it comes off as being judgmental of a persons life, IMO.

I see LDS posit the argument that if a proxy baptism doesn't work, what does it matter?

I don't know that it does, but I find myself perturbed on occasion when I think of the fact that there are LDS in my family who will most likely have this work done for me. It makes me feel like they think I am an idiot, who doesn't have sense enough to believe what is right. So I find it offensive from time to time.

What's interesting is Catholics, for example, don't recognize LDS baptisms as valid (even thought they will recognize other religion's baptisms as valid), yet they too are against the practice of LDS baptising on behalf of deceased catholics. If it isn't valid who cares?

LDS are not performing proxy baptisms because of the thought that their beliefs are invalid, they are giving proxy baptisms because they believe the beliefs of others are invalid.

[abqfriend]

Makes no sense at all. You are seeking information on Catholic Records- The Catholic Church seeks no information on you.

Catholics believe in infant baptism-we believe it is very important-how would LDS members feel if we requested birth records on LDS children and then came to their home and requested to baptize their children?

-We would not do that-I am just giving that as an example of respecting another's religious values-however wrong we feel they may be.

The issue is about respect to other religious traditions.

-Carol

One of the LDS top 3 religious values is to "Redeem the Dead". Aren't you not respecting the religious values of the LDS, however in error you feel those values are, by actively trying to surpress the names of deceased non-LDS?

Does that make sense?

[thesometimesaint]

Thinking:

Some people are too easily offended.

[Mormon Factor]

I have always found that to be offensive. It was like saying, "Sorry Mom, what you believed wasn't good enough." This lady's daughter loves her mother, that is why she did it. However, the underlying sentiment is that what her mother believed wasn't good enough. Regardless of intent, it comes off as being judgmental of a persons life, IMO.

But, why would that be offensive in that sense? People in most religions believe that their religion is the right path and that others are not in the right path. And so they 'evangelize' or they 'witness' to others. It isn't offensive and judgemental to want what you believe to be the truth given to others.

As a non-mormon, do you believe the LDS beliefs are good enough for Mormons to be saved in the Kingdom of God?

[Thunderfire]

My question is, what's the big deal? If they don't believe the LDS baptism really has any merit/ effect, who cares if someone is dunked in the name of someone from another religion?

Of course, this is merely my opinion. But I can put myself in there shoes and see it from there perspective in certain ways. As example, the Catholics already baptize people and for them, it may appear that the LDS are saying that â??ourâ? baptism is superior to the one already given. Now from what little I know of the Jewish faith, they do not believe they need baptized simply because they are already a covenant people. It was the gentiles who were baptized into the covenant which the Jews enjoyed from birth. So for them, the LDS baptism is in essence seeking to take away what had already been given by God as a birthright.

So now you can see the problem. For the Catholics, the LDS baptizing their dead is a slap in the face saying that the Catholic baptism is not acceptable to God and that the LDS baptism is superior. Same for the Jew. It is seen as a slap in the face in that there covenant status with God is not as superior as the LDS.

I know and affirm that the LDS Church has no wish to harm anyone, and that they genuinely do believe they are helping people with this practice. I'm only trying to address what is the "big deal" with these folks and how it is perceived by them.

Finally, we need to look deep and ask ourselves how we would feel if the Baptist, Methodist, Catholics (or any denomination) started baptizing by proxy members of the LDS for similar reasons! Would it be a big deal or would we simply pass it off? My guess is that we would probably do the same thing and ask them to stop (believing that our baptism was sufficient). Anyway, just my thoughtsâ?¦

[Thinking]

Thinking:

Some people are too easily offended.

Again. The offending party is deciding whether its actions are offensive.

[MichaelW]

Finally, we need to look deep and ask ourselves how we would feel if the Baptist, Methodist, Catholics (or any denomination) started baptizing by proxy members of the LDS for similar reasons! Would it be a big deal or would we simply pass it off? My guess is that we would probably do the same thing and ask them to stop (believing that our baptism was sufficient). Anyway, just my thoughtsâ?¦

I'm not suggesting that the Church is anything like these groups--it is nothing like them--but how would you feel if your deceased family was baptized or otherwise consecrated in the membership of Wicca, or Satanists, or the Klan? Some people view the Church with as much distaste, and even though such views are completely misguided, I suspect that's why some object so strongly.

Ultimately, I don't think it should matter why people feel the way they do. The Church should respect their wishes. If it's true (as the article suggests) that even a small number of Holocaust victims are still finding their way into temples despite the Church's good faith efforts to prevent it, I don't see how taking the issue into the court of public opinion is wrong. Perhaps that's the only way to ensure such mistakes never happen again, if that's even possible.

(And again, I'm not relating the Church to bigoted or Satanist groups, only acknowledging that some people view them as such, and it may affect how they view proxy baptisms).

[thesometimesaint]

They are still too easily offend. Deal with it.