Reader comments
Utah Jewish leader wants to keep talks going about LDS baptisms
158 comments | Read story
mom of three | 6:43 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
To those who aren't LDS: If God isn't a "respector of
persons" and loves all of His children, how is it that He could love some
of His children enough to provide them a way back to Him, ie: baptism for one,
and the billions of people that have never even heard of Him have no chance?
That makes NO sense! That is not a just and loving God. The God of mankind is
a loving and just God who has provided a way for ALL of His children. Baptisms
for the dead were performed in Bible times (it's in the New Testament). God
has provided a way for ALL of his children who have EVER lived upon this earth a
chance to hear the gospel and then CHOOSE FOR THEMSELVES whether or not they
accept it. Some have the chance here, others when they pass on, but it is still
THEIR choice. Baptism by proxy only provides the ordinance if THEY CHOOSE to
accept it. I am grateful for a loving Heavenly Father that would never condemn
those that didn't have the opportunity to hear about Him while living on
the earth.
Waltler | 6:48 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
What is there to talk about, when the prophet speaks the discussion is over. The
Lord's work for baptising the dead must go forward regardless of intolerant
opposition.
Laura | 6:59 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I feel like this is a case of punishing the parent for the misdeed of the child.
The LDS Church said they would remove the names, and they have done so/are
doing so. They asked the members to stop baptizing Holocaust victims, and those
of us who choose to abide by the teachings of the church have done so.
However, I wonder if some of the names that are on the list are the ancestors of people who are now members of the LDS church. If this is the case, then the LDS member has every right to submit and baptize those people. To cease talks because some members choose to exercise their free agency is foolish. We are better off to work together to get those who continue to go against the church's request to stop what they are doing.
However, I wonder if some of the names that are on the list are the ancestors of people who are now members of the LDS church. If this is the case, then the LDS member has every right to submit and baptize those people. To cease talks because some members choose to exercise their free agency is foolish. We are better off to work together to get those who continue to go against the church's request to stop what they are doing.
Comments continue below
Lighten Up | 7:22 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I was struck by the comment, "The lives and souls of six million innocent
people are deeply sacred to us," he said. "Everything was stolen from
them � their life and their future." They died because
they were Jewish...
Well guess what? Mormons have died for the same reason, simply because they were Mormons. The act of vicariously baptizing the dead is an act of LOVE, not hate or disrespect. Maybe it's time the Jewish community shows a little tolerance for Christian beliefs, including those of the LDS Church.
Well guess what? Mormons have died for the same reason, simply because they were Mormons. The act of vicariously baptizing the dead is an act of LOVE, not hate or disrespect. Maybe it's time the Jewish community shows a little tolerance for Christian beliefs, including those of the LDS Church.
Policy of the Past | 7:22 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I think the Church should go back to the way baptisms for the dead were done in
Nauvoo and early Utah: baptizing relatives in your own family line, only after
receiving revelation that they person in your family line has accepted the
gospel.
Very Presumptuous | 7:34 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I said it yesterday and I'll say it again today, these Jews are very
presumptuous to claim to speak for the fallen Jews of the Halocaust. The fact
they share the same religion does not make them spokes people for others in
their religion.
You are authorized to speak for yourself, who elected or appointed you to speak for these people?
You are authorized to speak for yourself, who elected or appointed you to speak for these people?
A doctrine of fairness | 7:35 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
While I think the LDS Church should do its best to honor the wishes of groups
such as the United Jewish Federation of Utah, I get the impression that a lot of
people misunderstand the doctrine of baptism for the dead. This is my
understanding of it:
Baptism is necessary for salvation. If God requires baptism for salvation, he would not be just unless he allowed all his children to be baptized. Yet the vast majority of people who have ever lived and died on this planet have not had the opportunity to be baptized. So God allows living individuals to be baptized by proxy for those who have passed on. The deceased will have the opportunity to make an informed decision regarding whether to accept or reject this ordinance. The church does not assume that anyone for whom this ordinance is performed has necessarily accepted it, and does not count such deceased individuals as church members.
It is one of the fairest doctrines I have ever heard of: no one need go to hell or purgatory simply for having been born in the wrong time or place. Any unfairness in life gets compensated for in the afterlife.
Baptism is necessary for salvation. If God requires baptism for salvation, he would not be just unless he allowed all his children to be baptized. Yet the vast majority of people who have ever lived and died on this planet have not had the opportunity to be baptized. So God allows living individuals to be baptized by proxy for those who have passed on. The deceased will have the opportunity to make an informed decision regarding whether to accept or reject this ordinance. The church does not assume that anyone for whom this ordinance is performed has necessarily accepted it, and does not count such deceased individuals as church members.
It is one of the fairest doctrines I have ever heard of: no one need go to hell or purgatory simply for having been born in the wrong time or place. Any unfairness in life gets compensated for in the afterlife.
Diriye Barre | 7:39 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Brothers and Sisters,
I am talking those who their parents perished in Holocust
be close and friendly with the only restored church on earth
the only church which respedts ancient Isreal and its values
the only church that respects Native Americans and their
realy true history.
What you call Mormon or LDS is new Zion of Israel in
modern day America. think about it and give consideration.
if love Israel and Judaisim, you will love LDS.
A Better Way to Resolve Issue | 7:41 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Might I suggest a compromise?
If there are Jews who don't want their ansestors baptised, let them give these names to the LDS church and get an agreement with them not to enter these names in the database. These Jews should not assume they have any right, nor should the LDS church presume that these Jews have any right to speak for Jews that are not their relatives.
Being the same religion as someone else, gives you no right to speak for that person, does it?
If there are Jews who don't want their ansestors baptised, let them give these names to the LDS church and get an agreement with them not to enter these names in the database. These Jews should not assume they have any right, nor should the LDS church presume that these Jews have any right to speak for Jews that are not their relatives.
Being the same religion as someone else, gives you no right to speak for that person, does it?
let it drop | 7:44 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
i think this has gone on for too long. i just read the church's statement
on lds.org. they have done everything they were asked to do. this guy needs to
stop playing hardball and assist the church in trying to do what they have
agreed upon.
leiberman | 7:45 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I am jewish and see lds as part of restoration ancient
Judeo-Christian faith. thank you for helping my ancestary.
kirsten | 7:59 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
is anyone here making any effort to see things from the other's view and
show respect to differing ideas? Perhaps a bit of gracious humility is needed
instead of defensive argument on both sides.
Svoboda | 8:18 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I say let the dead decide. It's their "lives" even though they
are "dead"
Canadiandy | 8:24 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
The Church seems to be doing everything it can to respond to the concerns of
these groups.
For those who are critical of the Church's past practice, consider this. If the Church had decided early on not to perform work for these people there would likely have been a cry against the Church based on discrimination.
It seems that the critics cry no matter what the Church does on any issue. I'm glad the Church has been so respectful in the past and will continue to be so in the future on sensitive issues like this.
For those who are critical of the Church's past practice, consider this. If the Church had decided early on not to perform work for these people there would likely have been a cry against the Church based on discrimination.
It seems that the critics cry no matter what the Church does on any issue. I'm glad the Church has been so respectful in the past and will continue to be so in the future on sensitive issues like this.
How dare they | 8:28 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
How dare the LDS church show such disrepect to anyones ancestors. Who do you
think you are? Keep your greeding narsacistic hands off of other peoples dead.
Instead od stealing the dead perhaps you should tend to your living. let's
see, significant spouse and child abuse, high rates of teen suicide, the white
collar crime capitol of the country as you prey on your own, the highest
prescription drug abuse in the nation. Yes leave our dead alone and tend to
your living and quit fooling yourselves.
JoriPage | 8:40 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
... oh wait a minute! Jesus was a Jew wasn't he? ... didn't his cousin
John baptize him? That must have REALLY hurt the sensibilities of the Jews!
Virginia | 8:49 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I was born in a Catholic hospital and for the first two months it was uncertain
whether I would live. I presume that, in accordance with what I have heard is
Catholic practice, I was not just vicariously but actually baptized by the
attending Sisters. I feel nothing but gratitude if this was done by such loving,
selfless persons who had as much concern for my eternal life as for my physical
life. To consider such an outpouring of love "disrespect" would show
disrespect for the goodness humankind is capable of.
Easterner | 8:57 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Read these postings. Read them carefully. Now tell me how on earth, with your
arrogance and disrespect for those who suffered through the Holocaust, can you
call yourselves Christians? I am sure this will not post, but at least I can say
it. In the encounters I have had with members of the LDS Faith, there is one
thing you have on your mind : CONVERT! Not only do you annoy us at our doors
with your intrusive and obnoxious attitudes, you are determined to carry it on
after we are dead and buried. Please keep your cult and its narrow minded people
within the confines of Utah. Is there anyway to undo that 1896 Statehood thing?
Leave us alone !
Follow the Rules | 9:12 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
It doesn't come down to anything but the LDS members following the rules.
It is not the LDS Church that is at fault. It is some members. I am a Family
History Consultant and you are not suppose to submit names that are not related
to you. Period! Who ever submitted those thousands of names where not following
the rules. People break the rules and do it Catholic Records in the South from
Father Hebert's books too. It is wrong. You do YOUR Family History not
find a book and start submitting names. You don't get "points"
for how many names you submit. If those people would have followed the rules the
LDS Church would not have to be defending itself.
Leave people alone! | 9:15 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
There was plenty of christianity around in Europe in the 40's those that
chose not to embrace it made the choice not to. Respect their decision and
don't try to force your rituals on them when they're dead. Family or
not that doesn't entitle you to act on someone elses behalf. I was not
excommunicated but CHOSE to have my records removed from the church. I want
nothing to do with it or any of it's "promises" or offers. That
goes for when I'm dead too. Even 200 years down the road when I'm dead
I want nothing to do with this religon. Family or not if someone tries to
baptize me after I'm dead I swear to god I'll be back to haunt them. I
made my choice and it's what I want. Hopefully by the time I'm dead
the LDS faith will respect people that aren't LDS enough to honor thier
wishes.
Pat S | 9:22 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
If the Jews truly felt their Chuch was true, and one of their teachings was
baptism, and to ensure that everyone had an opportunity to receive that saving
ordinance they offered the service of baptism for the dead (to give everyone an
opportunity to belong to their religion), I certainly wouldn't care if
someone stood in proxy for ME and was baptized for ME, after I died.
What if they were right? That would give me an extra chance to be saved by an additional religion. Plus, I (and not some other living person) could determine if I wanted to accept it or not! And if I didn't believe in it, I would just ignore what I would think was a foolish tradition. What harm has been done? Where is the offense?
What if they were right? That would give me an extra chance to be saved by an additional religion. Plus, I (and not some other living person) could determine if I wanted to accept it or not! And if I didn't believe in it, I would just ignore what I would think was a foolish tradition. What harm has been done? Where is the offense?
Bickertonite from Michigan | 9:26 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Why not renounce the "false and vain and foolish doctrine"[2 Nephi
28:9] of baptism for the dead now and forever?
It's a win-win.
The Jewish people are now made happy, and the Utah LDS people are fiscally blessed even more because LDS temple building then ceases, which frees up funds for the far more needful and important humanitarian work, missionary work, BoM translation, chapel construction, etc.
It's a win-win.
The Jewish people are now made happy, and the Utah LDS people are fiscally blessed even more because LDS temple building then ceases, which frees up funds for the far more needful and important humanitarian work, missionary work, BoM translation, chapel construction, etc.
TooFar: | 9:30 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Of all the insensitive things I have read on these posts, finally some of you
have convinced me forever that LDS should never make claim to being Christian.
To even dare compare the persecution of Latter-day Saints to Jewish persecution
through the centuries and culminating in the Holocaust, goes beyond the pale.
Jews were not persecuted for their religion! Six million Jews were slaughtered
because of blood lines! How dare you compare the persecution of a 19th Century
Cult that members JOINED voluntarily to the intentions of the Nazis to eradicate
a race of people world-wide? To quote " At long last have you no
shame?" This time you have gone too far !
Reason | 9:45 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Too many people today go fishing for a reason to take offense. Accept
someone's good intentions and learn to appreciate their world view even
though it may be different from your own.
Molly Pritchard | 9:48 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
It must be miserable to be continually offended.
Tracy Hall Jr | 9:55 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Moses and Elijah were great prophets. Did all Israel obey them? Can we expect
more of the Mormon prophet?
At his advanced age, it is understandable that Michel is impatient, but the Church really is making a good-faith effort to respect Jewish sensibilities. I do commend the United Jewish Federation of Utah for its patience in the matter.
Please, everyone, please understand that Mormons do not "posthumously baptize" anyone. Freedom of choice - the moral agency of man -- is a fundamental principle of Mormonism, and we believe that the spirits of men retain their moral agency after death.
One cannot choose between apple pie and pumpkin pie unless both can be had. Accordingly, we work diligently to "bake the pie" for everyone who has ever lived, although we understandably work hardest for our own ancestors.
But nobody, nobody, forces anybody, living or dead, to eat the pie.
It is those who seek to take the pie away who are trying to force their will on others.
Tracy Hall Jr
At his advanced age, it is understandable that Michel is impatient, but the Church really is making a good-faith effort to respect Jewish sensibilities. I do commend the United Jewish Federation of Utah for its patience in the matter.
Please, everyone, please understand that Mormons do not "posthumously baptize" anyone. Freedom of choice - the moral agency of man -- is a fundamental principle of Mormonism, and we believe that the spirits of men retain their moral agency after death.
One cannot choose between apple pie and pumpkin pie unless both can be had. Accordingly, we work diligently to "bake the pie" for everyone who has ever lived, although we understandably work hardest for our own ancestors.
But nobody, nobody, forces anybody, living or dead, to eat the pie.
It is those who seek to take the pie away who are trying to force their will on others.
Tracy Hall Jr
Julie | 10:13 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I am struck by this quote: "He said he hopes that LDS Church members
understand how deeply Jews are hurt by proxy baptisms of Holocaust
victims."
That statment tells me the Jewish people believe they are not receiving adequate concern for their feelings and honor for their dead. I find that to be a key point to consider.
I believe the Church has made huge strides to demonstrate commitment to honor Jewish concerns and I believe it will continue. I believe Time and consistent action by the Church will prove the commitment of the Church to honor the Jewish community's feelings. Additionally, as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I believe we need to futher the work of Church officials by honoring their request to no longer posthumously baptize Holocaust victims.
How good of Church officials to defend Church members who recently submitted Jewish names for temple work as "well meaning," yet how much better we members can do to demonstrate sensitivity by not repeating this unfortunate blunder.
That statment tells me the Jewish people believe they are not receiving adequate concern for their feelings and honor for their dead. I find that to be a key point to consider.
I believe the Church has made huge strides to demonstrate commitment to honor Jewish concerns and I believe it will continue. I believe Time and consistent action by the Church will prove the commitment of the Church to honor the Jewish community's feelings. Additionally, as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I believe we need to futher the work of Church officials by honoring their request to no longer posthumously baptize Holocaust victims.
How good of Church officials to defend Church members who recently submitted Jewish names for temple work as "well meaning," yet how much better we members can do to demonstrate sensitivity by not repeating this unfortunate blunder.
Anonymous | 10:17 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
You've alienated Jews. And beer drinkers. And the summum. Ironically,
it's the gays on your doorstep. Enjoy. You invited them.
Anonymous | 10:48 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Just because someone is baptized by "proxy" doesn't mean that
their whole life history is changed and they become a documented
"mormon." I don't see much of a problem here. It seems to me
that LDS members are just being targeted for their beliefs. Can someone tell me
why people go out of their way to attack LDS doctrine? This particular doctrine
doesn't hurt anyone. It doesn't take anything and it doesn't
impose anything on any living family members or even on the history of the
deceased. Why worry? To me, this just looks like people trying to make the LDS
church look bad.
A Friend | 10:53 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
Elijah has come to restore sealing keys "turning the hearts of the fathers
to the children and the hearts of the children to their fathers. and Moses the
keys of gathering of Israel. The Jews do not believe Elijah has returned. Nor
for that matter the Messiah himself. The gathering of Israel will encompass more
than the tribe Judah. So let's get on with the rest. If they agreed with
the practice of Temple baptisms then they would agree with our doctrines etc etc
that Elijah has returned. The jews see things in terms of "cut in
stone" the abstract thinking was later adopted by the Greeks which we are
certainly more to think in terms of. ALthough the the Mormons don't add
these baptisms to the rolls of the Church, perhaps the church should include in
the record they are Jewish. All Israel will be gathered and retain the tribal
status. Perhaps we need to make that clear to them. Their people have been
preserved and the Church just like Joseph of old is there to help preserve them.
Anonymous | 11:00 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
This is just a disrespful practice. It shows no respect fot your ancestors or
there faith. I wold be ashamed to disrespect others souls in this manner. How do
you know what you are doing is ofr good and not evil? Think abouy iy.
I'm Jew and baptized Mormon | 11:00 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I will work on my ancestors until I die to save them according to the scriptures
and will do everything to save them they are my love one too I would be here if
were not for them. Read Corinthian "If the dead rises not, why are
baptising for the dead" Paul was trying to prove that there is resurrection
that's why If I catch one of my own in the Holocust you bet I respect him
or her cause I want to give them a chance whether they join on the other side of
the veil or not I'll pesonally take thier name and baptize them. I love my
family.
The Deuce | 11:08 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
I guess I don't understand why the LDS Church would baptize these
individuals if their ancestors don't want this done. This is one time the
LDS Church needs to back off and accept the request.
LearnedOne | 11:22 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
to anoymous@10:17
Did not know who the Summum were until now. Thanks. They sound cool. Hope they get their stone tablets.
Did not know who the Summum were until now. Thanks. They sound cool. Hope they get their stone tablets.
Guy from Orem | 11:34 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
A generation ago, when approval of names for proxy ordinances was highly
centralized and bureaucratic, active filtering of Holocaust names was far more
feasible.
Now, members may submit names with minimal participation and vetting by the central Church organization. This applies to all names, and is intended to streamline the work. There are drawbacks such as that temple work is done multiple times for many people, and that it is very difficult to prevent members from submitting a given class of names (such as Holocaust survivors) for temple work.
Has this Holocaust memory organization submitted an exhaustive "do not baptize" list? If not, perhaps they should and this could be incorporated into the Temple-ready process by which names are approved for ordinance.
Now, members may submit names with minimal participation and vetting by the central Church organization. This applies to all names, and is intended to streamline the work. There are drawbacks such as that temple work is done multiple times for many people, and that it is very difficult to prevent members from submitting a given class of names (such as Holocaust survivors) for temple work.
Has this Holocaust memory organization submitted an exhaustive "do not baptize" list? If not, perhaps they should and this could be incorporated into the Temple-ready process by which names are approved for ordinance.
J bone! | 11:34 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
WAIT A SECOND HERE..
Has anyone stopped to ask if this work is being done by people who are related to the holocaust victims. Who is the church to tell me that I cannot do the work for my dead great grandfather. That is ridiculous. This jewish spokesman is acting like he speaks for people but they are not even around to express their desires. How convenient. He is simply expressing his desires and doing so without the dead persons consent. Well I am a voice, and I say I want to do the work for my great grandfather because I feel like he would like me to if he were here.
Has anyone stopped to ask if this work is being done by people who are related to the holocaust victims. Who is the church to tell me that I cannot do the work for my dead great grandfather. That is ridiculous. This jewish spokesman is acting like he speaks for people but they are not even around to express their desires. How convenient. He is simply expressing his desires and doing so without the dead persons consent. Well I am a voice, and I say I want to do the work for my great grandfather because I feel like he would like me to if he were here.
the arrogance | 11:41 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
being non-LDS I have to say I'm shocked at the insensitivity of some of the
LDS posters here. I had no idea some of their people are so intolerant, self
righteous, and arrogant in their beliefs. Is this the attitude behind the face
of people who have expressed to me tolerance for other's beliefs? I think
I'm going to walk away from this a little more wary of my neighbors. Just
a few quotes:
"I say stop the dialogue, be sensitive, don't do it in mass, but just ignore them."
"Perhaps, the Jews ought to stop playing victim,"
"If it's done out of love and not spite them we should not care."
"The Jews will come to know and embrace the fullness of the gospel in all due time."
"If you don't understand that Mormons endured persecution too than you deserve no respect. Now butt out of our business."
"It is obvious to me that the Holocost angle is being played up in this situation in a dishonest and distorted way."
In my religion we are taught to respect the beliefs/feelings of others. I'm happy to be in a religion that practices such Christian values.
"I say stop the dialogue, be sensitive, don't do it in mass, but just ignore them."
"Perhaps, the Jews ought to stop playing victim,"
"If it's done out of love and not spite them we should not care."
"The Jews will come to know and embrace the fullness of the gospel in all due time."
"If you don't understand that Mormons endured persecution too than you deserve no respect. Now butt out of our business."
"It is obvious to me that the Holocost angle is being played up in this situation in a dishonest and distorted way."
In my religion we are taught to respect the beliefs/feelings of others. I'm happy to be in a religion that practices such Christian values.
Really? | 12:00 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
Jpjazz said: As an LDS member, I have no issue with other faiths baptizing
myself or our leaders posthumously."
The issue here relates to the recording of such an act. How would you like your descendants to do a search for you in a hundred years or so and find that you are listed as a baptised Scientologist. Same thing. It is truly offensive. Lighting a candle for someone is very different than recording a baptism.
The issue here relates to the recording of such an act. How would you like your descendants to do a search for you in a hundred years or so and find that you are listed as a baptised Scientologist. Same thing. It is truly offensive. Lighting a candle for someone is very different than recording a baptism.
Yeah, attack those mormons!! | 1:28 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
They are an easy target! C'mon people get on the wagon... say al those evil
nasty things to make yourself feel better, and justify those feelings of guilt
and remorse! Bellow it out!! Let those angry sentiments just spill out. It does
not matter if you have a clue as to what you are talking about, c'mon, they
are easy targets! Yeah baby, tear them down! Those darn Mormons anyway, trying
to do good and be faithful to their God, what�s wrong with
those idiots anyway! Geez, they must like making all of us heathens look bad by
trying to make this world a better place or something... I am sure that is what
they are trying to do. Yeah, right on!
Sherri B. | 2:50 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
I am a Jewish convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and
while living in Washington DC for 3 years, I was able to collect names from the
Holocaust museum to add to the Church database - so that we could do baptisms
for those people. But the database did not let me do it. Why? Those people
are not my direct relatives. I do however, have a right to do the work for my
own relatives. My other Jewish/LDS friends have that same right. The Temple
work that is being done is 100% legitimate. It's a shame that one angry man
can cause such a big fuss and make all Jewish people look as awful as he looks.
Don't you believe it!
LivingAbroad | 3:31 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
I guess I don't get the point. I have no objection to being baptized by any
faith after my death. My mom died in October and I'll let her be baptized
into any faith. In fact, I'll provide all my genealogy and agree all my
predecessors can also be baptized into any faith. If the faith is wrong, no harm
done. If it's right, I've covered my bases. The response from the
Mormons could be: "Look, our faith requires us to search out and baptize
everyone we can. We believe it gives people the option to accept or reject our
faith in the afterlife. We notice that your faith requires you to: have
Mezuzahs, wear phylacteries and yarmulkes and sing the Israeli National Anthem
at the conclusion of your services. We won't ask you to change the tenets
of your faith, and in return, we ask you not to try to change the tenets of our
faith. By the way, we notice that you don't allow proselyting missionaries
in Israel. What's up with that?"
RESPECT ALL | 3:33 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
While, I don't believe baptism after death has any power or matter a tiny
bit I still find that practice very offensive.
For many Baptism a very special sacrament or ritual that forms the basis for an idividual's faith. For many Baptism is the time when one, of his or her own free will, decides which denomination they will follow GOD with. So even though these dead baptisms are useless they are a direct afront to the choices made by the person and a slap in face for the life lived by the individual.
If Catholics went around birthing wards baptising Mormon babies you can be sure that there would be a major outcry. Even if you didn't think the baptism would work.
Baptising non-Mormons agaisnt their will is the same thing. It boils down to respect. I respect your rights until they interfer with the rights of others. Baptism of the dead is a major interference.
For many Baptism a very special sacrament or ritual that forms the basis for an idividual's faith. For many Baptism is the time when one, of his or her own free will, decides which denomination they will follow GOD with. So even though these dead baptisms are useless they are a direct afront to the choices made by the person and a slap in face for the life lived by the individual.
If Catholics went around birthing wards baptising Mormon babies you can be sure that there would be a major outcry. Even if you didn't think the baptism would work.
Baptising non-Mormons agaisnt their will is the same thing. It boils down to respect. I respect your rights until they interfer with the rights of others. Baptism of the dead is a major interference.
Rediculous! | 4:06 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
What a stupid & trivial discussion!! It�s remarkable in
our modern time of broadminded liberal excess that anyone would take offense to
the LDS church's absolutely innocuous practice of performing "proxy
work for the dead". Such offence is irrational, petty & rooted in the
purest form of religious bigotry!
Let Mr. Michel litigate the issue. Can there be any legal precedence for such an absurd proposition? How arrogant & presumptuous of Mr. Michel to assert that he speaks for deceased individuals!! It�s a ludicrous notion!!
Arguably, Mr. Michel's absurd little tantrum means any commitment/agreement the LDS church has made to refrain from submitting names of holocaust victims in the past is now officially void!
So, full steam ahead!! The LDS church should encourage members to submit every name they can find regardless of "holocaust" association!! God works in mysterious ways!!
Let Mr. Michel litigate the issue. Can there be any legal precedence for such an absurd proposition? How arrogant & presumptuous of Mr. Michel to assert that he speaks for deceased individuals!! It�s a ludicrous notion!!
Arguably, Mr. Michel's absurd little tantrum means any commitment/agreement the LDS church has made to refrain from submitting names of holocaust victims in the past is now officially void!
So, full steam ahead!! The LDS church should encourage members to submit every name they can find regardless of "holocaust" association!! God works in mysterious ways!!
Gramajane | 4:10 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
"David | 3:57 p.m. Nov. 11, 2008
It is important because it gives validity to Holocaust deniers. You enter a Jewish name into your database as Mormon and you alter history especially if you add 100 years into the future.
How would you have felt if I donated money to fight proposition 8 and wrote the donations were from Joseph Smith, Jr., Brigham Young, Emma Smith, Gordon B. Hinckley?"
OBVIOUSLY the DATE of deaths and the DATE of a donation would be a declaration of the truth that someone ELSE did it.-- Just as the dates are all there for proxy baptisms.
It does NOT alter history! Get real!
I'm thrilled to have Jewish ancestors and Native American ones and I'm ALSO thrilled to be a member of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints.
If people don't believe proxy baptism for the dead has any validity- (it's in the N.T.- as a positive point to the resurrection!) they might think it a great thing to keep the LDS busy doing something worthless!!
I'm pleased this Utah Jewish leader is talking! God bless him! And God bless us ALL to seek, find and accept truth!
JediMormon | 5:32 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
In my personal opinion, what it comes down to is this: who has the larger right
over posthumous baptisms of dead ancestors, the ethnic group the ancestors were
associated with, or the direct descendant(s) of those ancestors? If a person of
Jewish descent who also happens to be LDS desires that his ancestors receive the
LDS temple ordinances, then what gives any ethnic group or person who has no
relationship with the ancestors in question, the right to stop the descendant
from going forward with the temple ordinances? Absolutely none, in my opinion.
The only time I see any argument is the rare occasion when two descendants of
the same ancestor(s) are on opposing sides of the issue.
re the arrogance | 11:41 p.m. | 6:31 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
The arrogance lies on the other side.
I think it is arrogance for a small group of Jews today to claim to speak for all the Jews who died during the holocaust who are not their relatives.
The church in my opinion went way too far in agreeing not to baptise all Jews just because a few arrogant self appointed Jews told them they shouldn't baptise any of these holocaust Jews.
Were I the church I would have said to these people.
"We don't recognise your right to speak for all these 6 million, however if you have ansestors who are among this group, give us their names and we will do what you ask for YOUR ansestors".
I think it is arrogance for a small group of Jews today to claim to speak for all the Jews who died during the holocaust who are not their relatives.
The church in my opinion went way too far in agreeing not to baptise all Jews just because a few arrogant self appointed Jews told them they shouldn't baptise any of these holocaust Jews.
Were I the church I would have said to these people.
"We don't recognise your right to speak for all these 6 million, however if you have ansestors who are among this group, give us their names and we will do what you ask for YOUR ansestors".
paebo | 7:34 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
I respect the agreement the Church made in 1995; however, the unspoken agreement
needs to be that (seeing that noone actively seeks out and performs ordinances
in proxy of Jews lost in the Holocaust) if, for example, I am LDS and I have
Jews in my lineage who died during the Holocaust, I have a right to exercise my
religious convictions and perform ordinances for MY family, passed on.
That's a religious freedom; there is no law that states that any other surviving members need to consent. I give the Jews their space, but my family is my business. But maybe there is some oversight. What do you guys think?
That's a religious freedom; there is no law that states that any other surviving members need to consent. I give the Jews their space, but my family is my business. But maybe there is some oversight. What do you guys think?
Church to blame | 7:35 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
The Church has made it so easy to submit names without tying them into family
lines that anyone can submit a name. Because of the volume of names this has
caused the Church ho longer even tries to check the names. They just send them
through for endowment/ At the present time the church is trying to get the
computer system up where the names can be checked. Contrary to popular belief
this program iw still several years away. Right now 20 percent of the names done
in the temples are duplications. THe Church has tried to live up its agreement.
THE MEMVERSHIP HAVE NOT. Most believe that the more names they submit the more
blessings. Often the members don't bother to check what religious
background the person might have. Until the membership of the church stops
submittig Jewish names this issue will never be resolved. I have done
genealogical work in the genealogical library. I HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING
ANYWHERE THAT INDICATES THAT JEWISH NAMES SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED.
Of course they do | 7:50 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
Jewish groups know that the only way they can control the church is by
browbeating them through these "dialogues".
If the LDS Church ever got tired of all their unreasonable demands to stop practicing their religion then these groups would have no power over them.
If the LDS Church ever got tired of all their unreasonable demands to stop practicing their religion then these groups would have no power over them.
all about timing | 8:32 a.m. Nov. 12, 2008
I think that the talks were probably cut short when they were because of the
existing public press against the LDS church. (Or at least this went into the
thought process.) I generally believe that when private talks are terminated and
made public, it is because there is a belief that a public forum will exert more
political pressure. What better time than now to try to make the church look
intolerant?
Secondly, the point needs to be made that baptisms for the dead do not make anyone a Mormon. The argument that this ordinance takes away someone's heritage is based on a flawed premise that temple work literally makes someone a member of our church. Instead, the baptisms for the dead are simply a sacred rite performed by the living in behalf of the dead so that they may CHOOSE in the after-life whether they WANT to accept the gospel declared by that faith.
Secondly, the point needs to be made that baptisms for the dead do not make anyone a Mormon. The argument that this ordinance takes away someone's heritage is based on a flawed premise that temple work literally makes someone a member of our church. Instead, the baptisms for the dead are simply a sacred rite performed by the living in behalf of the dead so that they may CHOOSE in the after-life whether they WANT to accept the gospel declared by that faith.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Related content
- Obama-mania lives on in Europe 11:58 a.m.
- Missing DNA can promote obesity 11:54 a.m.
- Former Flash center suffers stroke 11:46 a.m.
- Chavez ally's bro. linked to scandal 11:37 a.m.
- Jobless vie for holiday sales work 11:30 a.m.
- Handmade ornament collection 11:28 a.m.
- Queen tells paparazzi to back off 11:26 a.m.
- Romanians vote for president 11:19 a.m.
- Gender balance in science 11:14 a.m.
- Chinese target global market 11:03 a.m.
- Y., U. to learn bowl destinations
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony
- The forgotten ship: USS Utah
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing
- Snowy roads cause accidents, delays
- George lost in rivalry hatefest
- Tiger's SUV, personal life are a wreck
- BYU basketball: Cougars crush Dons
- Utahns want health care reform bills
- Kurt Bestor: Joy for the world
- Why is Y. ignoring spew of hatred?
312 - Letters: Liberal because LDS249
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing202
- Hate not limited to 1 in-state rivalry189
- Aggies shoot past Cougars179
- N.Y. Senate rejects gay marriage128
- George lost in rivalry hatefest109
- Unbeaten BYU takes trip to Logan105
- Harpring's NBA career is over94
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony93
Trolley Square's annual Holiday Open House will feature visits with...
That does it — I'm having an affair! Thanks to Tiger Woods, David...
First, a big thank you to all who posted questions here for me to ask...
Latest comments
"Surprise!!!" seems pretty bitter. It is pretty much opposite of what some...
I meant the stadium will be called the MOF.
Lots of cheeky comments about a good athlete and good person. Must be...
BYU 26 Utah 23 Any questions about who is better this year? Hey,...
I think it's great that BYU gets to continue cashing undeserved bcs checks...
Wow,the next thing you know he'll be strutting around on an aircraft carrier...
RE: proudyewt | 10:20 a.m. Dec. 6, 2009 Ironic, that you conveniently...
This will NEVER happen. First, there are political motivations for...
Amen to what Anne at 11:21 a.m. said. How can it be that quarterbacks in...
It is sad how misinformed on facts a lot of you are. I am ashamed of some of...
Advertisements