Family Ethical Problem - Baptisms For the Dead

[_Jason Bourne]

Several points here, Jason.

1) perhaps members should have the right to submit family file names if they represent the only posterity of the deceased - but generally they do not. Just because there is a Mormon within the decendants doesn't make it set well with those that reject the mormonthink. There are many outside the church that just don't know what the names are used for. If they did, many would consider it a mockery/slap in the face to their family dynasty and for what these individuals stood for.

I could see that on the name extraction program to a certain extend sure.

2) People do care. For a church that borders on worshipping their dead

Oh please.

I would think they of all people would be more sympathetic to the various cultures that are sensitive to these issues. Why do you think John D. Lee's family pressed for his ordinance reinstatement even though he was a mass murderer? Legacy and a good name are everything - even if it is purely a facade - in Lee's case. Historically, the church takes the ethnocentric approach toward sensitivity.

3) There was a succesful suit against the church to remove/rescind holocast victims names from the temples ordinances. It does matter

One also might think the world would be grateful for the genealogical gold mine that the LDS Church has established based on this "peculiar" doctrine. Perhaps the trade off is a fair one.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

Members have a right to submit family file names. Perhaps the name extraction program could be hampered. However, but for the issue with the Jewish faith nobody really seems to care if the LDS find names and baptize them. And really what does it hurt?

Several points here, Jason.

1) perhaps members should have the right to submit family file names if they represent the only posterity of the deceased - but generally they do not. Just because there is a Mormon within the decendants doesn't make it set well with those that reject the mormonthink. There are many outside the church that just don't know what the names are used for. If they did, many would consider it a mockery/slap in the face to their family dynasty and for what these individuals stood for.

2) People do care. For a church that borders on worshipping their dead I would think they of all people would be more sympathetic to the various cultures that are sensitive to these issues. Why do you think John D. Lee's family pressed for his ordinance reinstatement even though he was a mass murderer? Legacy and a good name are everything - even if it is purely a facade - in Lee's case. Historically, the church takes the ethnocentric approach toward sensitivity.

3) There was a succesful suit against the church to remove/rescind holocast victims names from the temples ordinances. It does matter.

Was that the first, second or recent THIRD time LDS Inc was busted on this?

[_Inconceivable]

3) There was a succesful suit against the church to remove/rescind holocast victims names from the temples ordinances. It does matter.

Was that the first, second or recent THIRD time LDS Inc was busted on this?

I don't know, p.

I imagine that much is still initiated in the dark because there are some members that actually believe that God will justify their dishonesty.

There is a historical pattern that cannot be ignored.

[_Inconceivable]

Here is a short list of those that justifiably should be eliminated from proxy membership until Jesus comes:

Signers of the Declaration of Independence (many were revered shepherds of their respective congregations/religeons)
Deceased parents of part member families
Martin Luther
Martin Luther King
Every member of the Fancher Party
Billy Graham
Padre Hidalgo (Father of Mexico)
Elvis
Mother Teresa (and all others officially sainted by the Catholic church)
John D. Lee (mass murderer)
Joseph Smith Jr.
Emma Smith and her children
Karl Sagan
Next door neighbor that died two years ago who's children all belong to a pentecostal church
Every John Doe that I went through for
Any person with a decendent that says no.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

I know this has been tossed around at RfM several times, but wouldn't it be great to have an excommunications/resignations for the dead?

[_haleray]

I may be wrong, but I think that the Churches policy is that you need the family’s permission to do baptisms for the dead if the person died 100 years or less ago.

[_gramps]

Hi Renegade,

It is an interesting dilemma into which he put himself.

My take on it is that once he asked he should respect their wishes, or else why ask?

There is no one, that has already passed away, that won't get into heaven because their temple work wasn't done. God will always take care of those who love Him, so tell your uncle that they will be fine, as he probably well knows.

I would add this in: if he were to respect his family wishes, the rest of the family still living just might one day respect him enough to learn more about the church themselves. Win-Win all around.

[_Imwashingmypirate]

He can always just wait till they die and baptise them too lol. At the end of the day if future generations are TBM the family will be baptised eventually. My mum disagrees with baptisms for the dead, she claims the church is stealing people's souls. I believe they have a choice. Although I would imagine it can be a bit intrusive on their spirits especially if they haven't had oppurtunity to discover what our church is about and/or are trapped in limbo. I've done baptisms for the dead and it feels nice in the temple. I think the chlorine kinda makes you sleepy though.

[_CaliforniaKid]

If someone asked me if they could do work for me or my dead relatives, I'd say "sure, break a leg." The way I see it, if Mormonism isn't true then work for the dead is completely irrelevant. And if it makes Joe Schmoe happy to believe he's saving my grandpa, more power to him.

But I do think that people's wishes should be respected, especially if they feel strongly about the subject.

I know this has been tossed around at RfM several times, but wouldn't it be great to have an excommunications/resignations for the dead?

Do you have deceased Mormon family members? Perhaps you should write to your bishop and ask that this be done.

I was very much moved by an older couple we met while knocking on doors many years ago. She didn't speak the native language well and was having trouble getting rid of us. Her husband comes to the door, both of them visibly shaken. He rolls up his sleeve and puts it in our faces, " do you know what this is?" "have you seen before?". He holds up his wife's arm as well. It was just a tattoo with numbers. I thought, how strange.. what is so significant about a simple tattoo?..

Then he said, "we are from Auschwitz.. we are Jews.. we cannot change..please go away.."

It was quite a moving experience for us 19 year olds. But still, at the time, we felt very sorry for them that a little tatoo was what came between them and their salvation.

How woefully ignorant and insensitive I was. I just did not understand.

Wow. That must have been quite the experience!

[_JoetheClerk]

Even if she does not do the work someone else may search out the names and do it.

Since the relatives are dead, why even ask? Just do it and keep quiet. Nothing wrong and no problems come up. Better she does the research and work on it so at least the information is accurate.