Proxy Baptism Submission Restrictions

[Stargazer]

The person was an adult child of the deceased, so met the requirements. But surely it's wrong? Knowing full well they very specifically wanted nothing to do with the religion whilst alive. Then baptising them into it the minute they were dead. How can this possibly be right or justifiable?

That question impinges directly on me, sir. My father, a non-member (and a committed agnostic) to his death, once told that he did not want to be baptized after his death. I actually waited until 4 years after his death (you can't do it "the minute they [are] dead" anyway -- the rules require one year's wait) before being baptized, ordained to the priesthood, and endowed in his place in the Washington DC temple. Later my wife and I stood in his and my (much earlier predeceased) mother's place and had them sealed together for time and eternity.

Now. You plan to stand (or sit) there are tell me that I have committed some grave error? You do not have the right to judge.

Let me tell you how this works out in reality. There are quite a few different possibilities, out of which I have extracted these few:

Possibility 1 - there is no God, no afterlife, and when we die we no longer exist as concious entities. In this possibility it does not matter what I did in my father's name after he was dead. Churches and religion are as meaningless as our existence.

Possibility 2 - there is a God, but there is no afterlife and God doesn't care what you do. In this possibility it does not matter what I did in my father's name after he was dead. Churches and religion are as meaningless as our existence.

Possibility 3 - there is a God, there is an afterlife, and God rewards you for your deeds, good or bad, but the LDS church isn't "true" in any meaningful sense. In this possibility it does not matter what I did in my father's name after he was dead, because nothing I could do could affect him in that case.

Possibility 4 - there is a God, there is an afterlife, Joseph Smith was a true prophet and founded the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS. In this possibility, my father may have accepted the Gospel in the afterlife and will in that case be grateful I disregarded his wishes. Even if he did not accept it, God commanded me to see to my father's welfare so far as it was in my power, and I obeyed His command.

Now. The reality is simply this: the only circumstances under which it matters whether I have my father baptized by proxy after he is dead is if the Church is actually true and the ordinance could do him some potential good. It doesn't matter one way or another if the Church is not true, despite and regardless of any silly protestations to the contrary.

I am 1/16th Konkow Maidu Indian (Northern California). My ancestors' culture necessitated that when a person died his friends and relatives could no longer speak his or her name because of the possibility that he or she might hear it, and be disturbed in his or her rest thereby. My great great great grandfather utilized a loophole in the custom by which he abandoned his birth name and took his father's name as his own, enabling him to speak his father's name, which was in English translation "Big Fish Dam Builder". Was he wrong to do so? Yes or no? Did he harm his father in this? Yes or no? My great great grandmother's name was Flower. In order to speak her name after her death, her relatives chose one of the other alternatives, which was to "deface" the name so it wasn't the name she used during life: they referred to her as Dead Flower. Was this more or less respectful than what her father did with respect to his father? Answer to all of this: it only matters if the Konkow Maidu system of belief was actually based in reality, which I will argue it did not. With all due respect to my Konkow ancestors, I speak their names, their true names, with no hesitation. Are you going to gainsay me this privilege?

[Stargazer]

Trolling again?

Might I remind you of the board guidelines.

Be respectful of others?

Judging Others?

Personal Attacks?

Your mission, which you have plainly stated elsewhere, is:

If I can help prevent one human being from becoming conned into the great mormon delusion - mission accomplished.

You are obviously here trolling for converts. And it is plain from your posts so far that you are not here for respectful discussion. You are here in full attack. And you expect the believing LDS here to react to your bomb-throwing by complacently accepting your attacks?

I was asking a serious question about my Grandparents.

Pardon me for stating the obvious, but no, you didn't. You're asking a question to which you already know the answer, having been raised LDS, but having rejected it. You are using your grandparents to troll for arguments.

I said a minute, because when I was 8 years old it felt like my grandmother was barely cold in the grave when she was being baptised into a religion she despised.

The thread topic is 'Proxy Baptism Submission Restrictions' - I wondered if there were any restrictions to baptising people who explicitly reject the religion whilst alive?

Nope, there are no such restrictions. And what difference would it make if they did reject it while alive? They will then surely reject it in death. Or will they? Perhaps not even you know.

I discovered this board yesterday, so far I've posted on 2 topics. Both of which have had a serious impact on my life and both of which I care about deeply. I've now twice been accused of trolling? (I'm not even exactly sure what that means, but it sounds derogatory) And every syllable I've written has been either nit picked or criticised.

The board guidelines claim to want participation from both LDS and Non-LDS, this is obviously not the case.

It's a shame, I don't remember the Mormons from my childhood/youth being so deeply unpleasant or incredibly rude.

Frankly, you can keep it all to yourselves.

Tschüss xxx

Don't let the screen door hit you on the way out, then. I'm won't stand in the doorway preventing your exit.

Perhaps the Mormons from your childhood were not having their beliefs defamed and derided at the time you were interacting with them. Perhaps we get lots of people like you coming by for brief drive-by attacks, expecting the LDS here to cringe and suffer in silence, and then recoil in surprise when we respond in kind.

Seriously, you're so new here you can't see that we have plenty of LDS, non-LDS, and former-LDS , with some of the latter being quite negative against the Church, but all who remain do exceed what you've shown so far in all-around respectfulness, even in their opposition to what we believe. If you stick around, you'll meet Xander, a former-LDS who is quite a persistent cuss, telling us we are a bunch of clueless Morgbots -- but usually in a respectful way that you would do well to emulate. There are others, too..

But as I said, you appear to have a Mission here. Your mission will not prosper unless you pursue it with more restraint and respect than you have so far.

[Mormonme]

Your mission, which you have plainly stated elsewhere, is:

You are obviously here trolling for converts. And it is plain from your posts so far that you are not here for respectful discussion. You are here in full attack. And you expect the believing LDS here to react to your bomb-throwing by complacently accepting your attacks?

Pardon me for stating the obvious, but no, you didn't. You're asking a question to which you already know the answer, having been raised LDS, but having rejected it. You are using your grandparents to troll for arguments.

Nope, there are no such restrictions. And what difference would it make if they did reject it while alive? They will then surely reject it in death. Or will they? Perhaps not even you know.

Don't let the screen door hit you on the way out, then. I'm won't stand in the doorway preventing your exit.

Perhaps the Mormons from your childhood were not having their beliefs defamed and derided at the time you were interacting with them. Perhaps we get lots of people like you coming by for brief drive-by attacks, expecting the LDS here to cringe and suffer in silence, and then recoil in surprise when we respond in kind.

Seriously, you're so new here you can't see that we have plenty of LDS, non-LDS, and former-LDS , with some of the latter being quite negative against the Church, but all who remain do exceed what you've shown so far in all-around respectfulness, even in their opposition to what we believe. If you stick around, you'll meet Xander, a former-LDS who is quite a persistent cuss, telling us we are a bunch of clueless Morgbots -- but usually in a respectful way that you would do well to emulate. There are others, too..

But as I said, you appear to have a Mission here. Your mission will not prosper unless you pursue it with more restraint and respect than you have so far.

OK, point taken. I'll tone it down. I'm glad you took the time to look at my website. It's only been online for a couple of weeks and is my direct response to my own personal discovery of the Mormon involvement in Prop 8. The same issue is currently very hot in the press here, which is why I found this board the other day. (Googleing Mormons and Gay Marriage UK - I'm curious to know if the Mormons are going to try anything on like that in the UK?).

I left the church a very long time ago, and no, I didn't know the answer to the question: Is it OK to get proxy baptised for someone who in life very deliberately rejected the religion. (I was actually hoping the answer was no, it's not OK to completely disrespect the wishes of the living as soon as they're dead so I could reprimand my own family) I think you'll find the vast majority of Non-Mormons find this practice rather distasteful (Hence the press using it as a weapon against Romney). In fact your new best friends the Catholics have an entire page on their own official website stating that it not only directly contradicts the teachings of the bible on many levels but it also directly contradicts The Book of Mormon. Catholic Answers: Mormonism's Baptism for the Dead

Trolling for converts? Converts to what? I'm Agnostic. lol And I believe in the Truth.

[Deborah]

My DIL does a lot of genealogy and she was able to have the work done for her grandparents soon after they died. However, other individual family members where she was not closely related had to be deceased around 100 years or have the ok of living close relatives. Since its not an issue with her non-member family she was able to do the work short of the 100 years.

I am picturing a person in this life who never really had the opportunity to learn the gospel or who was influenced by his own prejudices or misinformation, who then goes beyond the veil and sees the bigger picture and desire to embrace the gospel. Imagine the frustration when he learns that his mortal family members are fighting against anything being done for him because of his and their ignorance and prejudices. I suppose that is part of hell, knowing your own stubborness and ignorance has affected your loved ones and therefore keeping you from progressing further. I imagine he would love to return to his loved ones as Marley did to Scrooge to beg them to change their ways.

On the other hand if they still remain stubborn it has made no difference whatever, just makes the living who did the work feel like they did their job.

[TAO]

OK, point taken. I'll tone it down. I'm glad you took the time to look at my website. It's only been online for a couple of weeks and is my direct response to my own personal discovery of the Mormon involvement in Prop 8. The same issue is currently very hot in the press here, which is why I found this board the other day. (Googleing Mormons and Gay Marriage UK - I'm curious to know if the Mormons are going to try anything on like that in the UK?).

Does it matter?

I left the church a very long time ago, and no, I didn't know the answer to the question: Is it OK to get proxy baptised for someone who in life very deliberately rejected the religion. (I was actually hoping the answer was no, it's not OK to completely disrespect the wishes of the living as soon as they're dead so I could reprimand my own family)

That's your choice, to choose what you believe. I am guessing your relatives feel to the contrary... or else, your grandparents would not have been baptized.

In any case, I hardly think it is disrespectful. Giving people who have died a choice is wonderful. How come you do not see it that way, I ask? Do you not want her to have such a choice? For that is all it is; the giving of a choice.

I think you'll find the vast majority of Non-Mormons find this practice rather distasteful (Hence the press using it as a weapon against Romney). In fact your new best friends the Catholics have an entire page on their own official website stating that it not only directly contradicts the teachings of the bible on many levels but it also directly contradicts The Book of Mormon. Catholic Answers: Mormonism's Baptism for the Dead

That page is old news, ya know =p. It was made in 2004. Whether the practice contradicts the BoM is a matter of opinion and interpretation of the verses, as well. For example, the verse in Alma is talking about those who already had a chance to join the church. People who are being proxy baptized were not members. Thus the verse would not apply.

In addition, revelation overrules the verse, regardless of what it means.

Ya need to try harder that that, my friend. It just doesn't do any good to recycle the same things people have used for a long long long long time =p. Now I'm not saying go grab newer stuff. I'm saying try thinking about it on your own, and come up with your own stuff, instead. And you still need to chill a bit more - I can still feel the tenseness. Okay =).

Trolling for converts? Converts to what? I'm Agnostic. lol And I believe in the Truth.

We state many things. And we think we believe in the truth. And we proselyte it.

You said that your goal is to stop people from converting. And you believe you know the truth. And, here, you are proselytizing it.

Thus, would not Stargazer's statement would be applicable?

But as I said, you appear to have a Mission here. Your mission will not prosper unless you pursue it with more restraint and respect than you have so far.

Take his wise advice, it is helpful indeed, that it is.

[Calm]

I'm curious to know if the Mormons are going to try anything on like that in the UK

The Church has varied its approach from the beginning, in part due to the variation of the path that gay activists themselves and others have used to attempt to legalize gay marriage in different locations and times (by the vote, by the legislature, by the courts, etc.).

[Pahoran]

OK, point taken. I'll tone it down. I'm glad you took the time to look at my website.

Let me just add that I, too, have seen your website, so I know where you are coming from.

I left the church a very long time ago,

But you still haven't gotten over it and moved on.

and no, I didn't know the answer to the question: Is it OK to get proxy baptised for someone who in life very deliberately rejected the religion. (I was actually hoping the answer was no, it's not OK to completely disrespect the wishes of the living as soon as they're dead so I could reprimand my own family) I think you'll find the vast majority of Non-Mormons find this practice rather distasteful (Hence the press using it as a weapon against Romney).

I'm not sure that "the vast majority of Non-Mormons" are quite as arrogant and censorious as that. It's pretty presumptuous to presume to censor how another person chooses to remember their own deceased loved ones, don't you think?

In fact your new best friends the Catholics

Is that an example of you toning down the sarcasm, is it?

What will it look like if you decide to ramp it up?

have an entire page on their own official website stating that it not only directly contradicts the teachings of the bible on many levels but it also directly contradicts The Book of Mormon. Catholic Answers: Mormonism's Baptism for the Dead

"Catholic Answers" is not their official website. It is a website where individual Catholics opine on various subjects.

And you cannot possibly expect us to take seriously someone who rejects the Book of Mormon arrogantly presuming to tell us what it means. That is arrogance of truly Evangelical proportions.

Trolling for converts? Converts to what? I'm Agnostic. lol And I believe in the Truth.

The "Truth" with a capital T. And you have a website that proselytes for your jaded, cynical, tendentious view which you arrogantly dub "The Truth about the Mormon Church." You state your purpose thus:

My intention is to keep this site as simple as possible sticking to just a few of the main points I believe will show anyone investigating the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints just how wrong it is.

To give you your due: In proclaiming your anti-Mormon agenda so openly, you are being more honest than most of your fellow-haters. They invariably try to pretend that they are telling the "whole story," or something. You are quite open about the fact that you are just dealing with a few anti-Mormon talking points in order to convince people to accept your position. Of course that's all any of the others do as well, but they'd rather gnaw their own arms off than admit it.

Regards,

Pahoran

[volgadon]

Trolling for converts? Converts to what? I'm Agnostic. lol And I believe in the Truth.

[Stargazer]

Oh, that was funny. I lived in England once, and the part about the farmer telling his wife, "Well you better go, dear, we don't want to make a fuss!" made so much sense.

Is it tea time, yet?

[Mormonme]

Volgadon: Not quite sure what the point of your video was?

Boston Tea Party? The English do love their tea. I'm Australian, living in London. I prefer fresh Italian Coffee in the Morning with my Vegemite on toast.

I'm also not an Athiest, I believe in God, or at least some form of higher power, just haven't found what that higher power is yet? All I have to go on so far is overwhelming evidence that this higher power is not currently represented by any existing religion.

[KevinG]

Volgadon: Not quite sure what the point of your video was?

Boston Tea Party? The English do love their tea. I'm Australian, living in London. I prefer fresh Italian Coffee in the Morning with my Vegemite on toast.

I'm also not an Athiest, I believe in God, or at least some form of higher power, just haven't found what that higher power is yet? All I have to go on so far is overwhelming evidence that this higher power is not currently represented by any existing religion.

Smarter than all the religionists in the world... How do you cope with the weight of that supreme intelligence?

[Mormonme]

Smarter than all the religionists in the world... How do you cope with the weight of that supreme intelligence?

No not smarter, just don't believe in fairy tales lol.

[TAO]

Mormonme, what is and isn't a fairy tail is largely up to the conclusion of the person reading, that it is =p.

[KevinG]

No not smarter, just don't believe in fairy tales lol.

Seems like cindarella and the evil stepsisters are still in your repitoire.

Edited March 16, 2012 by KevinG

[Mormonme]

Seems like cindarella and the evil stepsisters are still in your repitoire.

Well... I did do La Cenerentola (Rossini Opera) a couple of years ago. So you're bang on. Cinderella is in my repertoire. lol

[wenglund]

....just don't believe in fairy tales lol.

That is debatable in regards to your self-perception and your view of religion.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-