Another Mormon Leak: This one is Damaging to Church Public Image

[JulieM]

26 minutes ago, Calm said:

If the First Presidency cleared him, he could receive it in this life, but I think they would be waiting for a clear revelation to allow it.

Do we know if the First Presidency cleared Hitler to be baptized or to receive his temple ordinances?  That would be interesting to know.

Prophets have taught that murder is unforgivable and murderers should not be baptized now or after death:

"Murder violates the sanctity of life and cuts off the ability of its victims to "work out their destiny" (Benson, p. 355). Moreover, because "man cannot restore life," and restoration or restitution is a necessary step for repentance, obtaining forgiveness for murder is impossible (Kimball, 1969, p. 129; D&C 42:18-19). Murder wrenches all lives connected to the victim, and ultimately the perpetrator of this crime suffers even more than the victims. "For Cain suffered far more than did Abel, and murder is far more serious to him who commits it than to him who suffers from it" (Kimball, 1982, p. 188).

Secular punishment for killing is to be proved and "dealt with according to the laws of the land" (D&C 42:79). Those who have been convicted of, or have confessed to, homicide cannot be baptized without clearance from the First Presidency, and excommunication of members guilty of murder is mandatory. Joseph Fielding Smith, as an apostle, indicated that vicarious temple work should not be done for deceased murderers (DS 2:192)."

[Calm]

Church standards:

"

Understand whose names you can submit. [7.3.1]

The Church has given the following guidelines regarding names you may submit for temple ordinances:

“Generally, you may perform temple ordinances for deceased persons one year or more after the date of death without regard to the person’s worthiness or cause of death. If you have questions, please contact your bishop or branch president.

“Before you perform ordinances for a deceased person born within the last 95 years, obtain permission from the closest living relative. Relatives may not want the ordinances performed or may want to perform the ordinances themselves. The closest living relatives are, in this order: a spouse, then children, then parents, then siblings.

“You are responsible to submit names of the following individuals for temple work (the individuals must have been deceased for at least one year):

“•

Immediate family members.

“•

Direct-line ancestors (parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and so on, and their families).

“You may also submit the names of the following individuals who have been deceased for at least one year:

“•

Biological, adoptive, and foster family lines connected to your family.

“•

Collateral family lines (uncles, aunts, cousins, and their families).

“•

Your own descendants.

“•

Possible ancestors, meaning individuals who have a probable family relationship that cannot be verified because the records are inadequate, such as those who have the same last name and resided in the same area as your known ancestors.

“Do not submit the names of persons who are not related to you, including names of famous people or names gathered from unapproved extraction projects, such as victims of the Jewish Holocaust.

“You may submit the names of individuals with whom you shared a friendship. This is an exception to the general rule that members should not submit the names of individuals to whom they are not related. Before performing ordinances for a deceased individual who was a friend, you should obtain permission from the individual’s closest living relative” (Member’s Guide to Temple and Family History Work [2009], 30)."

https://www.lds.org/manual/introduction-to-family-history-student-manual/chapter-7?lang=eng

If I understand correctly, there is a notice that pops up when submitting that reminds people of this so one cannot claim ignorance for breaking the rules.

----

Just to be clear, I am thankful for God's Law and Mercy covering everyone who reaches out to him.  I am grateful I am not called to judge so I am able to choose mercy and forgiveness when I am strong enough to do so for everyone.  I am not there yet, but working on it.  At least I know my weaknesses in judging, my inability to truly know what life a person has lived even if in the same house.

 I know there is something else besides evil going on in the heart and mind of what was once a beautiful daughter of God raised in a loving family whose parents made mistakes, but never out of hate or anger, who for some reason became abusive, uncontrollably angry, unable to love or at least express it, able unfortunately to hate and to act on that...yet was very capable in every other observable aspect of her life.  I see endless evidence of people doing hateful, hurtful things that make no sense in the context of the rest of their lives.  It is possible evil was truly freely chosen and they chose it because at their eternal core that is who they are...and in fact I would prefer to believe that people like Hitler and Stalin and Dahmer and others like them were that way because of free choice, not because of brain damage or screwed up parents who were screwed up by their parents or because they were targeted by predators themselves or all of those other reasons one can see people's lives take sad and even horrible turns...I don't want anyone to have to live with the knowledge they tortured and killed and took delight in it as mortals if that is not who they truly are.

I am therefore not going to step forward and make eternal judgments even if I might make a judgment on a mortal situation based on what a person does in mortality.  I get why this might make little sense to those who don't have the same perception of eternity, whose gut says to them 'this is all we are, the whole picture, there are no missing pieces...nothing significant at least', but their belief doesn't make mine nonsense anymore than my belief makes theirs meaningless.  We cannot prove our truth is Truth, not yet at least.

I can say instead that this and that action is wrong, even that some extreme actions are evil with no redeeming value in themselves...though people can choose in their reactions to these events to be redeemed by something else.  Erich Fromm's own struggle to find light in darkness has had a great impact on my perspective.  There are others not capable of finding such redemption.  I have no understanding of why suffering occurs in those situations.  I trust instead in God's love that he will heal, there will be no scars, just added strength like when a bone breaks until we don't need that strength any more.  I hope that somehow meaning is found, but if I learn there isn't I will wait upon God to tell me why and choose not to judge him evil for allowing it.

 So I can be annoyed by the person who decided it would be fun to proxy baptize Hitler without feeling the need to be embarrassed by it or less than joyful that if he had family that converted, they have a right, even a duty to see the ordinances were done (though I would not fault them if they prayed and waited for a personal revelation they were to do so before acting on the commandment to perform ordinances for all our dead).  That Hitler gets included means I never, ever have to worry about loved or not so loved ones or wonder about anyone that lived in hard circumstances or doubt if I am doing right to protest if someone decides to declare that this person is off limits and has no right to receive proxy ordinances or to be considered as possible to be included in God's kingdom as some have done based on race or sex or beliefs or actions or whatever else.

It was not the right thing to do to submit the name of Hitler if they did not have permission to do so.  It is glorious that in the end even he will have an authorized baptism as everyone else will (at least until they have a chance to say themselves 'don't bother as I am not going to accept it', it is possible that once the dead can move among us like the living or some such thing in the Millennium that the same rules will apply to them as the living) just as it is glorious he will have to suffer every last minute drop of pain he inflicted on someone else if he does not fall to his knees in recognition and terrible remorse of the agony he caused others and want to make their pain as if it never existed, no matter what he has to do.  I believe that someone like him---because they have harden their hearts so deeply and so hard that their depth of their being won't be penetrated with 'normal' sorrow---won't be able to be fully open to the Atonement until they are at a stage they beg to suffer as they made others to suffer so that they in some way can bring peace to the hearts of those they destroyed, but thankfully it won't be needed by their victims because God can bring love and hope and peace by removing the pain, not by meeting the need for revenge.  Don't know, otoh, if it will be needed by them to suffer as they made others to or not to unearth what humanity they have left.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Calm

[bluebell]

7 hours ago, saemo said:

Gosh, baptized Hitler in the same font as those whose murders he is responsible for, were baptized. Victims who have living relatives to this day. Where's the empathy for them?

Maybe too soon? Maybe wait until the milllenium for special cases, to get permission from God himself? Until then he can rot in spirit prison?

Maybe the oft told Mormon anecdotal story of the spirits of the dead hanging around temples to applaud their proxy work, sounds like a penny dreadful paperback, when it comes to Hitler.  My folk most likely would phone up an exorcist.

There's two, I probably could think of more if you like. 

Maybe Christ was just kidding when He commanded us to love our enemies and pray for them and do good to them?  

It just seems weird when Christians get upset that someone is trying to follow Christ, and attempt to argue why they shouldn't be doing it. 

As a Catholic, I think that 3DOP's post reflected a better understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ from a non LDS point of view. 

[saemo]

41 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Maybe Christ was just kidding when He commanded us to love our enemies and pray for them and do good to them?  

It just seems weird when Christians get upset that someone is trying to follow Christ, and attempt to argue why they shouldn't be doing it. 

As a Catholic, I think that 3DOP's post reflected a better understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ from a non LDS point of view. 

Well aren't I all put in my place. I wonder if 3DOP will ever tire of being the Mormon bludgeon against Christians?

We're back then to conditional treatment where Hitler fares better than the living. 

[Ouagadougou]

7 hours ago, JulieM said:

Do we know if the First Presidency cleared Hitler to be baptized or to receive his temple ordinances?  That would be interesting to know.

Prophets have taught that murder is unforgivable and murderers should not be baptized now or after death:

"Murder violates the sanctity of life and cuts off the ability of its victims to "work out their destiny" (Benson, p. 355). Moreover, because "man cannot restore life," and restoration or restitution is a necessary step for repentance, obtaining forgiveness for murder is impossible (Kimball, 1969, p. 129; D&C 42:18-19). Murder wrenches all lives connected to the victim, and ultimately the perpetrator of this crime suffers even more than the victims. "For Cain suffered far more than did Abel, and murder is far more serious to him who commits it than to him who suffers from it" (Kimball, 1982, p. 188).

Secular punishment for killing is to be proved and "dealt with according to the laws of the land" (D&C 42:79). Those who have been convicted of, or have confessed to, homicide cannot be baptized without clearance from the First Presidency, and excommunication of members guilty of murder is mandatory. Joseph Fielding Smith, as an apostle, indicated that vicarious temple work should not be done for deceased murderers (DS 2:192)."

That's why you can't spin this in a positive light -- it's an embarrassment either way.  The church baptized a descended mass murder (and maybe more than once); performed his endowments; sealed him to his parents and wife. It's also an embarrassment to the rest of the world and all those who suffered during WWII as a result of Hitler's actions.  We know Hitler killed ~11 million people, but I guess that doesn't matter with the church's notion that every human (probably around 50 billion) needs to get these ordinances performed.  What a waste of time to do Hitler's temple work, IMO.  

At no point in time when the name "Adolf Hitler" was getting read to those witnessing and performing these ordinances, nobody raised a red flag?  Nobody felt inspired or the power of the Hold Ghost to say, "wait, this doesn't feel right."  Maybe we shouldn't be doing Hitler's work right now?"  

But it's all ok because they have better security now, so just sweep it under rug.  

Edited February 22, 2017 by Ouagadougou

[Johnnie Cake]

9 hours ago, JAHS said:

So what do you suggest we do about it?  People have been criticizing the church for decades for all kinds of things. This is no different. 

Certainly someone could have prevented this by placing a filter of some sort to prevent it...or instructions could be given to Temple workers to use their minds, ask questions and don't act like robots when a questionable name goes through the system...but none of this matter now...the damage has been done...unless the names of other infamous individuals come through they could use this mistake as a learning opportunity to prevent Stalin, Pol Pot and company

[Johnnie Cake]

8 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I think we can afford to lose Johnny if that is his desire.

Yes please do not do my work...I don't want to be in any claimed kingdom that would allow a Hitler

[Ouagadougou]

3 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Certainly someone could have prevented this by placing a filter of some sort to prevent it...or instructions could be given to Temple workers to use their minds, ask questions and don't act like robots when a questionable name goes through the system...but none of this matter now...the damage has been done...unless the names of other infamous individuals come through they could use this mistake as a learning opportunity to prevent Stalin, Pol Pot and company

Or by a prompting of the Holy Ghost, basic judgement call, power of discernment.  I guesss they are so busy with the busy work in the temple, Hitler fell through the cracks on multiple occasions.  It's an absolute embarrassment...

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Maybe Christ was just kidding when He commanded us to love our enemies and pray for them and do good to them?  

It just seems weird when Christians get upset that someone is trying to follow Christ, and attempt to argue why they shouldn't be doing it. 

So, was Joseph Fielding Smith not following Christ when he taught:

"MURDERERS DENIED VICARIOUS ORDINANCES. 

We are called upon to assist in saving our own families.  This is the great duty the Lord has given to us, It is our privilege to go back and trace our ancestors as far as we can and then go to the temple and do the work for all of them. The Lord will judge whether they are worthy or not to receive what we have done. Remember, though, we do not have the privilege of performing the ordinances for murderers who shed innocent blood, nor for those who take their own lives. These are left in the hands of the Lord. If we find in our record one of this kind, we should pass him by and not attempt to do work for him. . . .

 

I cannot imagine a murderer like Nero, for example, having the work done for him and being entitled to the blessings of the celestial kingdom along with Isaiah who laid down his life for the truth."

 

-Doctrines of Salvation, p. 337

Edited February 22, 2017 by JulieM

[Ouagadougou]

12 minutes ago, saemo said:

Well aren't I all put in my place. I wonder if 3DOP will ever tire of being the Mormon bludgeon against Christians?

We're back then to conditional treatment where Hitler fares better than the living. 

Yep!  I can't get a recommend because I drink tea...but Hitler gets his work done...come on' man!  

[Johnnie Cake]

8 hours ago, saemo said:

Apostates, are worse off than Hitler! Put that in your pipe and smoke it. 

Interesting observation...so I a non-believer and former member, whom you choose to call an apostate, am worse off than a man responsible for the death either directly or indirectly of nearly 60 million human beings, Adolf Hitler...that's one screwed up doctrine in my humble opinion.  And I'm considered crazy.

[saemo]

6 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Interesting observation...so I a non-believer and former member, whom you choose to call an apostate, am worse off than a man responsible for the death either directly or indirectly of nearly 60 million human beings, Adolf Hitler...that's one screwed up doctrine in my humble opinion.  And I'm considered crazy.

Dude we're both apostates, here, in the virtual land of Zion.

Mormonism has complex conditions for what they call "love". Rarely do I qualify. Hitler though...I think we have it backwards. Doing proxy work for Hitler is to show the world just how unconditional Mormon love is! We're not fooled, is all. 

[Gray]

10 hours ago, Calm said:

We honor God's Law more than we despise Hitler.  Would you turn us into vigilantes?

I'm not sure how not baptizing Hitler in the temple would make us vigilantes? 

[Gray]

10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 Satan makes regular appearances in every one of the temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Or had you forgotten that?)  I'm told that President Hinckley even saw one of the workers portraying the devil in the live endowment as the worker got into an elevator at the Salt Lake Temple once, and said, "Well, hello there, Satan!"  Don't misunderstand: I'm not defending Hitler in any way, but saying he is evil removes responsibility for his actions from where it rightly belongs and places it on someone else.  It's the equivalent of saying, "The devil made me do it."  Hitler's actions were evil, and he will be held to account for them. I've got horse thieves, cattle rustlers, and maybe even a murderer or two in my ancestry. Should I pretend I know enough to decide that they don't deserve whatever level of salvation they desire and are capable of achieving, or should I give them the benefit of the doubt, do the ordinances that are required according to the LDS paradigm, and let God sort it out?

Satan plays the role of antagonist. They don't try to baptize him in the film. Just sayin. 

[bluebell]

17 minutes ago, saemo said:

Well aren't I all put in my place. I wonder if 3DOP will ever tire of being the Mormon bludgeon against Christians?

We're back then to conditional treatment where Hitler fares better than the living. 

I'm not trying to put you in any place.   But if you are going to be critical of another, then you should be able to handle a critical response (critical as in an analysis of the merits or faults of an argument and not critical as in judgmental) without getting snarky.

And, there is no conditional treatment where Hitler fares better than the living.  Hitler would never have been allowed to have been baptized while alive, while the children being spoken of can be baptized when they are 18.  

There is no way any reasonable person could know that and try to argue that Hitler  is treated better in that comparison.

[Gray]

Given that the church did not provide appropriate moral leadership contra Hitler while he was alive, is it too much to expect that we at least reject the ******* now that he's dead and we're all aware he was a monster? 

[Johnnie Cake]

When is it ok for a member to stand up to an action taken by the church and stay STOP This is not right.  Is it ok to question?  I'm literally gobsmacked by the turn this thread has taken.  I'm sincerely surprised that the believers here haven't questioned this correctness of doing this proxy work or felt embarrassed or felt indignation and concern over the negative light that is now going to be cast over the church because of someone performed Hitler's proxy work.  I can honestly say that even at my most dedicated entrenched point as a member of the church this action would have embarrassed me and I would  have stood up and publically questioned it and denounced it as completely inappropriate and pushed for some action on the part of the 1st presidency to undo the work.  If anyone has risen to the level of not deserving what you all claim is the pinicle of God's work it is this man.

I honestly don't understand why so many here are accepting of this. Why is there no outcry?  I don't get it, its mind boggling to me that so many find this as appropriate and ok.  I understand that many find my posts offensive or provocative or view me as a instigator...but put that aside for a bit and honestly consider what the bigger question being asked here.  Someone in the church baptized Adolf Hitler of all people into the LDS church, then someone else did his initiatory work and then another did his endowment and still someone else both performed and stood in for his sealing.  Multiple steps and multiple ordinances took place and NO ONE stopped to ask the question... WTFreak...should we really be doing proxy work for Mr Hitler who is dead?

Maybe you aren't the people that I thought you were...if the general consensus of board members is approval instead of indignation...I've misjudged you.  In my world this would never have taken place (although I don't blame the church directly for this) but once discovered I certainly would never defend it as so many here have.  The critics of the church are already having a field day with this...meme's are popping up on the Reddit board of Hitler in temple clothes and an Nazi armband proclaiming him as the newest member of the Mormon church...the difference between you and me is that I am offended by both this meme and that his work was done in the first place....where as I'm guessing you all would only be offended by the meme.  And the sad part is that all of this was preventable.  It didn't have to happen.  The church has felled the tree, carved the club and handed it to it's enemies and then told them to beat them over the head with it.  It was completely preventable

I've said my peace...but I will say in closing...the members of this board never end in surprising me...but in this case I am disappointed...  

Edited February 22, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[saemo]

9 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not trying to put you in any place.   But if you are going to be critical of another, then you should be able to handle a critical response (critical as in an analysis of the merits or faults of an argument and not critical as in judgmental) without getting snarky.

And, there is no conditional treatment where Hitler fares better than the living.  Hitler would never have been allowed to have been baptized while alive, while the children being spoken of can be baptized when they are 18.  

There is no way any reasonable person could know that and try to argue that Hitler  is treated better in that comparison.

You asked repeatedly for why baptizing Hitler is an ambarrassment. Obviously I missed that you viewed your question as rethorical.  My bad for being such a fool and actually answering your question. 

[bluebell]

22 minutes ago, JulieM said:

So, was Joseph Fielding Smith not following Christ when he taught:

"MURDERERS DENIED VICARIOUS ORDINANCES. 

We are called upon to assist in saving our own families.  This is the great duty the Lord has given to us, It is our privilege to go back and trace our ancestors as far as we can and then go to the temple and do the work for all of them. The Lord will judge whether they are worthy or not to receive what we have done. Remember, though, we do not have the privilege of performing the ordinances for murderers who shed innocent blood, nor for those who take their own lives. These are left in the hands of the Lord. If we find in our record one of this kind, we should pass him by and not attempt to do work for him. . . .

 

I cannot imagine a murderer like Nero, for example, having the work done for him and being entitled to the blessings of the celestial kingdom along with Isaiah who laid down his life for the truth."

 

-Doctrines of Salvation, p. 337

Church policy has changed.  We no longer teach that there is no forgiveness for suicide for example, and neither do we teach that murder is an unpardonable sin.  Besides that, even our scriptures show that a murderer can obtain a level of salvation, per David and Bathsheba, showing that this idea (that forgiveness for murder is possible) isn't anything new.

This is what the church currently teaches on it-

We know that the Atonement is efficacious for all except those committing the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost (see Matt. 12:31). However, in our associations with each other on earth, violation of the sixth commandment represents the most heinous crime that can be perpetrated. The murderer, by terminating an individual’s earthly experience, sins grievously against the person he has killed. Those who murder steal the precious gift of mortal experience from another and set themselves in open opposition to God, the giver of life.

Further, murderers place themselves in a position where it is impossible to ask forgiveness of the one sinned against or to make restitution—at least in this life. So grievous is the act that the Prophet Joseph Smith said murderers “cannot be forgiven, until they have paid the last farthing.” 

JSF was mistaken to teach that there is more than one unpardonable sin.  Scriptures clearly do not support that. It's also good to know that Doctrines of Salvation is not endorsed by the LDS church and contains many teachings that the LDS church does not currently sustain, such as the idea that using birth control is evil and can cause people to lose their salvation, temple divorce will cause someone to lose their exaltation and remarriage in the temple is never permitted, single women can be exalted while single men cannot be, etc.  

Like Mormon Doctrine by McKonkie, the book is JFS's opinions, some which the church currently agrees with and others that it doesn't agree with at all.  

For myself, I can't personally imagine that Hitler will ever be entitled to the blessings of the celestial kingdom, but that's not my call.  I find it consistent with the gospel of Christ and Christ's teachings to offer mercy while leaving the eternal judgments and justice to God, as He has commanded we do.

[bluebell]

22 minutes ago, Gray said:

I'm not sure how not baptizing Hitler in the temple would make us vigilantes? 

It we take the judgment and punishment of Hitler out of God's hands and instead sentence and carry out our own personal punishment of Hitler, that makes us vigilantes.   

If we declare that Hitler is unredeemable when God has not declared that, that makes us vigilantes.

[JulieM]

12 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Church policy has changed.  

Regarding Joseph Fielding Smith's statement that "we don't have the privilege of performing the ordinances for murderers who shed innocent blood"?  That was a teaching from one of our Prophets.  

When did this policy change? Do you have statements from leaders directing that it's now ok to do this work?

CFR

Edited February 22, 2017 by JulieM

[JAHS]

1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Certainly someone could have prevented this by placing a filter of some sort to prevent it...or instructions could be given to Temple workers to use their minds, ask questions and don't act like robots when a questionable name goes through the system...but none of this matter now...the damage has been done...unless the names of other infamous individuals come through they could use this mistake as a learning opportunity to prevent Stalin, Pol Pot and company

You will notice that the baptism for Hitler was done 24 years ago. Since then I think they have learned to be more careful to try and weed out certain types of names or individuals that might come through. But it's not going to be perfect; things will slip through the cracks and as many have said before it is not our place to pass judgment on who can or cannot receive the ordinances. 

[bluebell]

27 minutes ago, saemo said:

You asked repeatedly for why baptizing Hitler is an ambarrassment. Obviously I missed that you viewed your question as rethorical.  My bad for being such a fool and actually answering your question. 

I really have no idea what you are talking about.  

It wasn't rhetorical and i have no problem with you answering.  I wasn't critical that you answered, i was critical of your answer.  You should be able to see the difference and not take it personally. I haven't treated you with any disrespect.   All i've done is explain, using the scriptures, why i found your answer invalid or unconvincing.  

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Regarding Joseph Fielding Smith's statement that "we don't have the privilege of performing the ordinances for murderers who shed innocent blood"?  That was a teaching from one of our Prophets.  

When did this policy change? Do you have statements from leaders directing that it's now ok to do this work?

CFR

I quoted you the current teaching on the topic which states that murderers can be forgiven.  And, this whole thread is about how Hitler, a murderer, has had his ordinances performed.  

Unless or until the church comes out saying that it was done counter to temple policy (and they certainly might), those two references should handle your CFR.

[JulieM]

3 minutes ago, JAHS said:

You will notice that the baptism for Hitler was done 24 years ago. Since then I think they have learned to be more careful to try and weed out certain types of names or individuals that might come through. But it's not going to be perfect; things will slip through the cracks and as many have said before it is not our place to pass judgment on who can or cannot receive the ordinances. 

I think he's had his work done several times (if I am understanding correctly).

It's hard not notice the name "Adolf Hitler"  and chalk that up to simply slipping "through the cracks".  Many had to be aware of it and recognized the name!