Hayds Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I just read this online about Anne Frank being baptized for the dead on Feb 18 in a Dominican Republic temple. Anne Frank is a holocaust victim, so I am sure this will create more un-needed tension between Mormons and Jews. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/21/mormons-posthumous-baptism-anne-frank_n_1292102.htmlI was surprised to read that Anne Frank has been baptized for the dead 9 times. In my opinion, if she has been baptized 9 times her name should have been flagged way before it got into the temple. I know the technology is savvy enough these days where data bases can diseminate info and flag duplicates. Church spokesman Michael Purdy says its difficult to control who submits names, but if they were going through a common point and being scrubbed against current records it should be easy.I think some computer upgrades would solve this problem once and for all. Helen Radkey seems to be the one discovering all these Jewish names, and it has been speculated on these boards that Radkey could possibly be submitting names herself to cause trouble. If so, there are blaring holes in church software systems and they should be closed and fixed.
Garden Girl Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 How do you know that this is THE Anne Frank? It's not impossible that someone else would have that name...That said, I hope it wasn't the same person, however, it is my understanding that those with Jewish heritage can and do conduct family temple work for their direct lines whether someone is a holocaust survivor or not. Direct line is the key.GG
Stargazer Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Several years ago, I finally managed to get around to get the work done for a number of my ancestors. In one particular branch originally from French Canada, this was a large crew, going back to France in the 1500s. This was around the time that the current computer system was coming online. My wife and I and one of our sons visited the Seattle Temple a number of times taking care of some of these ancestors. It was about then that I discovered that the French Canadian branch was being "done" in widely separated areas at around the same time. I tracked one of them, who was baptized about three times, endowed twice, and sealed to parents once. These were current ordinances, as in someone in California did the baptism, then before they did the endowment, we did it before them, and the sealing was done by yet another descendant somewhere back east. By the time it was all complete, about four or five completely separate LDS descendants of the original founding family had done all the work, pretty much in complete ignorance that the work was being done by someone else at the same time.The funny thing was that the information on this branch was pretty much universally available for a good decade beforehand (in various places), but the work hadn't been done. And I remember knowing it, having it in my records, and not doing it. And I don't know why. But all of a sudden, one day I woke up to the fact that this work needed to be done, and so I mobilized and got it in motion. Only to find that suddenly, out of a clear blue sky, a bunch of other people in widely separated places, were also doing it at the same time.I am pretty sure that Anne Frank's work is being done by well-meaning people, who should be following the rules but aren't.I am also pretty sure that we four descendant branches of that French Canadian family were "pushed" by the Spirit to get off the dime and get the work done. The fact that we all responded says something about us, and it's good. Just that we all should have gotten it done much earlier.
Stargazer Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 How do you know that this is THE Anne Frank? It's not impossible that someone else would have that name...That said, I hope it wasn't the same person, however, it is my understanding that those with Jewish heritage can and do conduct family temple work for their direct lines whether someone is a holocaust survivor or not. Direct line is the key.GGThe Church has acknowledged that it was THE Anne Frank. I presume they would be able to tell because of the dates of birth and death, and so on.
Garden Girl Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I think the way the computer program is set up now will eliminate most of the duplication since one of the last steps is to check for previous work for each person. I was delighted to start the process for one of my ancestors only to find in the last step that the work had already been done. So, I didn't have to do it, and simply noted the information for my records.If people are following proper procedures under the new program, there should be rare duplications, unlike the past.GG
Storm Rider Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Unfortunately, this took place more often prior to computers. I suspect that we all have ancestors who have had their work done multiple times. I can imagine the frustration of others waiting for their work to be accomplished as the watched another person who did not research and confirm the work had not been done, turn in the name for another for the 10th time. It is just too easy to confirm if the work as been accomplished today and there is no reason for anyone to make this mistake unless they are either extremely dim-witted and passionate that they will be the one to do this baptism regardless of how many times the work has already been done. How wonderful it will be to tell you grandchildren that they did the work for Anne Frank, Thomas Jefferson, and Ghandi.
Duncan Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 My dad's uncle was in a political camp of some sort during WW2 but wasn't Jewish as far as I know would we be able to do the work for him I wonder? Is an uncle directly related or not?
Calm Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Direct relationship is grandparents to parents to children, etc. or sibling to sibling, husband to wife, I believe.
Robert F. Smith Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I just read this online about Anne Frank being baptized for the dead on Feb 18 in a Dominican Republic temple. Anne Frank is a holocaust victim, so I am sure this will create more un-needed tension between Mormons and Jews. http://www.huffingto..._n_1292102.htmlI was surprised to read that Anne Frank has been baptized for the dead 9 times. In my opinion, if she has been baptized 9 times her name should have been flagged way before it got into the temple. I know the technology is savvy enough these days where data bases can diseminate info and flag duplicates. Church spokesman Michael Purdy says its difficult to control who submits names, but if they were going through a common point and being scrubbed against current records it should be easy.I think some computer upgrades would solve this problem once and for all. Helen Radkey seems to be the one discovering all these Jewish names, and it has been speculated on these boards that Radkey could possibly be submitting names herself to cause trouble. If so, there are blaring holes in church software systems and they should be closed and fixed.I sent the following apology to Rabbi Benny Zippel of Chabad-Lubavitch of SLC:Dear Rabbi Zippel:You are very gracious in your public statements about the most recent violation of our rules of name-submission for LDS temple rites. Thank you.However, I am deeply affronted by the conduct of some of my fellow Mormons, and hope that appropriate disciplinary action will be taken.I have felt very welcome in the past at a Lubavitcher synagogue during Sabbath services, and I always try to be equally circumspect and kind in my conduct toward members of the Jewish community.Yours truly,Robert F. Smith 1
Kenngo1969 Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) Oops! I messed up. The new system makes that easy! Edited February 22, 2012 by Kenngo1969
Kenngo1969 Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I'm with Pahoran. I wonder if someone [Cough-cough-[Radkey]-cough-cough!] (or an associate) is salting the mine.P.S.: It would certainly go a long way toward explaining why she is so eager to have the "aggrieved" parties complain publicly about her finds and to have them pay her for her research. Edited February 22, 2012 by Kenngo1969
Saints Alive Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I've said it once and I'll say it again, I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. Either LDS Baptisms are offensive or Jews are hypersensitive, perhaps both, but I don’t think so. Edited February 22, 2012 by Saints Alive
Jaybear Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I'm with Pahoran. I wonder if someone [Cough-cough-[Radkey]-cough-cough!] (or an associate) is salting the mine.P.S.: It would certainly go a long way toward explaining why she is so eager to have the "aggrieved" parties complain publicly about her finds and to have them pay her for her research.Given the level of contempt for the "hypersensitive" concerns of the Jewish community expressed by the LDS members on this board, I suspect its more likely done by a members that shares your contempt. Edited February 22, 2012 by Jaybear
Buzzard Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 According to this article in the Deseret News this morning, someone on South Temple has had enough:http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765552916/LDS-Church-toughens-stand-against-improper-proxy-name-submissions.htmlBeing summoned to a Bishops court over improper submission of names should get someones attention. As has been speculated, it is reasonable to assume there is some mine salting going on, either by persons infamous or anonymous.
Saints Alive Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I suspect its more likely done by a members that shares your contempt.Coming from a non-mormon background,I have enough troble doing my own ancestors. I cant imagine someone Intentionally doing holocaust victims, just to stir the pot, unless they had the desire to harm the church. 1
Jaybear Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) Coming from a non-mormon background,I have enough troble doing my own ancestors. I cant imagine someone Intentionally doing holocaust victims, just to stir the pot, unless they had the desire to harm the church. From the comments I read here, I think its fair to say that some members don't think that the LDS Church, for the sake of PR, should kowtow or the unreasonable, hypersensitive demands of the Jewish community, PR, that was the word you used, right?Moreover, you assuming that those who performed the ceremony expected to "stir the pot." Frankly, my assumption would be that no one expected someone as zealous as Helen Radkey, scouring the records. Edited February 22, 2012 by Jaybear
Saints Alive Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) JayBear: There are two separate issues you are addressing. It should not matter to anyone that their ancestors are being posthumously baptized; we should have every right to do that. The other issue is that most people have enough of their own ancestors that the first issue shouldn’t be an issue. Edited February 22, 2012 by Saints Alive
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) How do you know that this is THE Anne Frank? It's not impossible that someone else would have that name...I wondered the same thing. I am sure William Lee has been baptized 1,000's of times. Every doctor or pharmacy I have ever been to has several. Sometimes we were there at the same time. Edited February 22, 2012 by Bill “Papa” Lee
wenglund Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Oh....wonderful. Another thread in which Jaybear can exercise his self-righteous indignation against the object of his disdain on a matter that has entirely nothing to do with him. Like with Radkey, this is a case of highly prejudices busy-bodies in action.Thanks, -Wade Englund-
thesometimesaint Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I would hope that my distant descendants would think enough of me to mention me at all let alone to mumble a nice word about me. However like the great bulk of humanity I am unknown but to a few close relatives and to God. Edited February 22, 2012 by thesometimesaint
Jaybear Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Oh....wonderful. Another thread in which Jaybear can exercise his self-righteous indignation against the object of his disdain on a matter that has entirely nothing to do with him. Like with Radkey, this is a case of highly prejudices busy-bodies in action.Thanks, -Wade Englund-What exactly did I say that could conceivably be construed by any rational adult as "self-righteous"? That aside, it is both interesting and relevant to my point, that you would blatantly violate the rules of the forum which clearly prohibit personal attacks, and yes labeling me a "highly-prejudiced busy body" is by definition a personal attack.Applying the logic expressed here, I suppose it would be rational to assume that Wade is an anti-Mormon agitator seeking to bring embarrassment to the forum.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) According to this article in the Deseret News this morning, someone on South Temple has had enough:http://www.deseretne...ubmissions.htmlBeing summoned to a Bishops court over improper submission of names should get someones attention. As has been speculated, it is reasonable to assume there is some mine salting going on, either by persons infamous or anonymous.The fact that the Church will discipline violators of this policy -- up to and including excommunication, which is the most serious penalty the Church can impose -- ought to signal to outsiders that the Church takes the agreement seriously. Yet there will still be antagonists who try to use this matter as club with which to bludgeon the Church. Edited February 22, 2012 by Scott Lloyd
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I have a feeling that most Jewish people don't care what we do. But we get people like Jaybear that come in and like to make a big deal about it.BTW I support what the Church has said an implemented.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I have a feeling that most Jewish people don't care what we do. But we get people like Jaybear that come in and like to make a big deal about it.BTW I support what the Church has said an implemented.I've long suspected that most people who are even aware in the first place of the Mormon practice of baptisms for the dead are indifferent toward it.
Jaybear Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 I have a feeling that most Jewish people don't care what we do. But we get people like Jaybear that come in and like to make a big deal about it.BTW I support what the Church has said an implemented.Huh. I don't care one bit about your proxy baptisms. What have I said, that would lead you to make that comment? BTW, I love the irony that you feel qualified to channel the thoughts of "most Jewish people".
Recommended Posts