Baptisms For The Dead: Ancestors Only?

[ERayR]

All,

I appreciate the helpful information several of you provided. As I said, I wasn't looking to argue anything here, but was asking for clarification. Those who assumed or asserted otherwise were mistaken.

One tends to be judged on past performance.

[Rob Bowman]

ERayR,

You wrote:

One tends to be judged on past performance.

That goes both ways.

You wouldn't have an answer for the discrepancies in the answers that Mormons have given to the question in this thread, by chance?

[T-Shirt]

The church still does extraction programs, and assuming the owners of the records agree, submit those names for temple work

I think you are wrong on this. The extraction program only provides a database, compiled from vital records, designed to aid genealogists, both LDS and non-LDS, in their research. To the best of my knowledge, the Church does not send blocks of names, from the extraction program, to the temples in order for the work to be done.

Best,

T-Shirt

[Calm]

ERayR,

You wrote:

That goes both ways.

You wouldn't have an answer for the discrepancies in the answers that Mormons have given to the question in this thread, by chance?

The discrepancies occur because not everyone is informed about it at the same level. The most accurate info for current practice is the easiest to obtain, simply go to the church website and look there for the specific instructions (Scott Lloyd provided the information for this topic).

[LeSellers]

I think you are wrong on this. The extraction program only provides a database, compiled from vital records, designed to aid genealogists, both LDS and non-LDS, in their research. To the best of my knowledge, the Church does not send blocks of names, from the extraction program, to the temples in order for the work to be done.

I just called the Denver Temple and asked.

Apparently most of the work here comes from family researchers. However, a sizable portion comes from "extraction programs", as I and others have said.

We should be careful to recognize that the policy statement in the CHI and elsewhere is for family researchers. The Church still operates at least one extraction program (and I got the impression there were several) using "various resources" from around the world.

Lehi

[bluebell]

You wouldn't have an answer for the discrepancies in the answers that Mormons have given to the question in this thread, by chance?

What discrepancies are you speaking of? Maybe a list of them so people know exactly what you are talking about would help get them cleared up.

[LeSellers]

You wouldn't have an answer for the discrepancies in the answers that Mormons have given to the question in this thread, by chance?

The only discrepancies I have seen is when some have tried to conflate the Church's policies for family researchers with those that apply to the Church's organized name extraction (again, a term I find misleading) programs.

Lehi

[Samurai2012]

I am confused by the following statement in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

"In the early years of the Church, proxy baptisms were performed only for direct blood ancestors, usually no more than four generations back. Today, Latter-day Saints are baptized not only for their own forebears but also for other persons, unrelated to them, identified through the name extraction program" (emphasis added).

Everything else I have ever read seems to state clearly that a Mormon may be baptized only for his or her own forebears. For example, the LDS Church, in response to a recent controversy involving a Mormon being baptized on behalf of President Obama's mother, issued the following statement:

"The offering of baptism to our deceased ancestors is a sacred practice to us and it is counter to Church policy for a Church member to submit names for baptism for persons to whom they are not related."

Can someone clear this up, please? I would like to have the facts straight regarding the LDS doctrine and practice concerning baptisms for the dead.

IMO, it's important that it's all done in order. In short, it's more important that I do what's in my own family than to look for some greatly admired historical celebrity like Johann Guttenberg, who's probably someone else's ancestor anyways.

[T-Shirt]

So I remain unsure as to how to characterize the LDS Church's official policy is on these matters.

Rob, I can see how this can be confusing. Frankly, even among members, the policies are not, always, well understood. Members who are not actively involved in Family History work, often, do not know the policies.

To answer your question, the information in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism is accurate, but, at the same time, there has been a policy change. In the early days of the Church, members did not have access to databases of vital records, so they tended to do the work for their immediate ancestors of whom they had sufficient knowledge. As technology and interest in genealogy have increased, more information has become available for researchers. The Church started the extraction program in order to provide better tools for researchers in finding names and information about deceased ancestors. The names from the extraction program are not sent to the temples for temple work, they are made available to aid research. As information has become more available, some, overzealous members have submitted names to temples for people to whom they are not related. Their hearts were in the right place, but it created some problems. The primary issue surfaced when some groups took offense at what was happening. The Church chose to create a policy in order to reduce the friction caused by some members. The Church has required that only the names of ancestors or close friends (for whom permission is granted) be submitted for temple work, and they have instituted a system to help enforce the policy.

The statement in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, "Today, Latter-day Saints are baptized not only for their own forebears but also for other persons, unrelated to them, identified through the name extraction program", is accurate. Most of the baptisms done in the temples are done by people who are not even remotely related to the deceased, but the names were submitted by members who are related to them. Many of these names were made available, to those submitting the names, through the extraction program.

Sorry, if I have made things more confusing.

Best,

T-Shirt

Edited August 4, 2011 by T-Shirt

[LeSellers]

Many of these names were made available, to those submitting the names, through the extraction program.

According to the people in the Denver Temple (I spoke to the President's secretary), the people's names come from two sources: family researchers, and Church-organized name extraction program(s). The latter do not just post those names/data to the familysearch website. They go directly to the Temples for ordinance work.

They also go to familysearch, but the work for these people will very often (usually) already have been done, or, at least, it's in the queue.

Lehi

[Rob Bowman]

T-Shirt,

Thanks so much for the effort. Your explanation makes sense, I think, but what puzzles me is that people in this thread who represent themselves as active in the work don't seem to agree on these things.

Rob, I can see how this can be confusing. Frankly, even among members, the policies are not, always, well understood. Members who are not actively involved in Family History work, often, do not know the policies.

To answer your question, the information in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism is accurate, but, at the same time, there has been a policy change. In the early days of the Church, members did not have access to databases of vital records, so they tended to do the work for their immediate ancestors of whom they had sufficient knowledge. As technology and interest in genealogy have increased, more information has become available for researchers. The Church started the extraction program in order to provide better tools for researchers in finding names and information about deceased ancestors. The names from the extraction program are not sent to the temples for temple work, they are made available to aid research. As information has become more available, some, overzealous members have submitted names to temples for people to whom they are not related. Their hearts were in the right place, but it created some problems. The primary issue surfaced when some groups took offense at what was happening. The Church chose to create a policy in order to reduce the friction caused by some members. The Church has required that only the names of ancestors or close friends (for whom permission is granted) be submitted for temple work, and they have instituted a system to help enforce the policy.

The statement in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, "Today, Latter-day Saints are baptized not only for their own forebears but also for other persons, unrelated to them, identified through the name extraction program", is accurate. Most of the baptisms done in the temples are done by people who are not even remotely related to the deceased, but the names were submitted by members who are related to them. Many of these names were made available, to those submitting the names, through the extraction program.

Sorry, if I have made things more confusing.

Best,

T-Shirt

[Kenngo1969]

Rob is what might be considered a career anti-Mormon and, as such, might expect to be disagreed with vigorously when coming to a board such as this. That said, it is my observation, for the most part, that Rob is treated civilly here.

Except by Ogres like me!

[urroner]

T-Shirt,

Thanks so much for the effort. Your explanation makes sense, I think, but what puzzles me is that people in this thread who represent themselves as active in the work don't seem to agree on these things.

I use to attend a Bible study class at work with a bunch of Evangelicals and they use to get into very interesting "discussions" about the basics of the gospel. It seemed that like us Mormons, they can also seem to not be able to agree on certain things that they "should know."

[Rob Bowman]

urroner,

You wrote:

I use to attend a Bible study class at work with a bunch of Evangelicals and they use to get into very interesting "discussions" about the basics of the gospel. It seemed that like us Mormons, they can also seem to not be able to agree on certain things that they "should know."

You are overlooking the fact that evangelicals represent a variety of denominations with different views on various secondary issues, whereas Mormons represent one religious organization.

[bluebell]

T-Shirt,

Thanks so much for the effort. Your explanation makes sense, I think, but what puzzles me is that people in this thread who represent themselves as active in the work don't seem to agree on these things.

The issue comes from the differences between being active in the temple and doing your own family geneaology and being active in the church's name extraction program. There are usualy only a handful (like 3 or 4 on average i would guess if the wards i've been in are any indication) people in each ward that are invovled in name extraction.

Like many aspects of the inner bureaurocratic(sp) workings of a church of any religion-if someone's not personally invovled or knows someone who is, they probably couldn't tell an outsider exactly how things are done or what the more obscure policies are.

Given the fact that the policies of the church have changed lately in regards to temple work, and that the name extraction program itself seems to change in how it's accomplished from time to time, it's understandable that not everyone has all the same and/or correct information off the top of their head.

[erincita]

What're you arguing this time, Rob, that church policy should never change?

And since I know you to be such an open, honest, sincere, guileless seeker after truth, Rob, I'm sure this explanation is more than sufficient, so it will be my first, last, and only post on the subject. Goodbye.

Dude. Kenngo. No need to be like that. If you're going to respond- no need to do it with sarcasm and rudeness. If you're not going to be sincere about it- then why even bother answering?

[Zakuska]

You are overlooking the fact that evangelicals represent a variety of denominations with different views on various secondary issues, whereas Mormons represent one religious organization.

While true the same could be said about the unity of doctrine and cohesion in the Apostolic church. How many times did the Apostles quibble about doctrine or something Jesus said and when Jesus saw them arguing he went and set them straight?

This even continued after the ascension... How many councils in Jerusalem were there were the whole congregation got together and there were disputations and Peter or John had to stand up and set things straight?

Or who could ever forget about Paul's disputations with his mission companions. Or how peachy-keen he and Peter got along? (Gal 2:11)

Edited August 11, 2011 by Zakuska

[erincita]

T-Shirt,

Thanks so much for the effort. Your explanation makes sense, I think, but what puzzles me is that people in this thread who represent themselves as active in the work don't seem to agree on these things.

Hi Rob,

There are a lot of members of the Church who aren't actively engaged in the process of researching and submitting names for proxy ordinance work. I'd venture to say most. Since they aren't in the trenches they don't always know how it works and what new technology is being used and how the system has evolved. The people who are going to know the most are the people who are in it and are actively and currently doing the work.

Advances in technology have made it a very flowing process over the past 15 years since I joined the Church. It can even be confusing sometimes for those who are in it and actively engaged- but like any evolving system things get sorted out with time.

The key thing to remember is that the process of SUBMITTING names goes through your own personal family tree on your LDS member account- so you have to establish how everyone is related to you. If they weren't, they couldn't be tied to your tree. Once that information is submitted, you can do the proxy work, have friends do the proxy work, or just send it to the temple and they will give the work to those who come into the temple but don't have work ready to do for their own ancestors.

Good question- I'd say you now know more than a lot of active members. Maybe you can get out there and set us straight. (I'm assuming you are not a member or not active based on some of the responses by those who seem to know you.

Erin

[Zakuska]

The issue comes from the differences between being active in the temple and doing your own family geneaology and being active in the church's name extraction program. There are usualy only a handful (like 3 or 4 on average i would guess if the wards i've been in are any indication) people in each ward that are invovled in name extraction.

We had an extraction center in our stake house where members would come 8-9 at a time and do name extraction. I was called to be the stake computer specialist and it was my job to keep all the hardware running. A couple years ago they cancelled the program and had me network all the computers together and get them set up on the new online family search.

[Rob Bowman]

Hi Erin,

Thanks for your comments. You wrote:

I'm assuming you are not a member or not active based on some of the responses by those who seem to know you.

I'm not a member. I am an evangelical Protestant scholar and apologist actively researching and writing about LDS subjects from that evangelical perspective--which is why some of the responses are hostile.