Quantcast

Comments about ‘LDS Church responds to 'ironic' proxy baptism charges’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, March 8 2012 11:50 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Brother Chuck Schroeder
A Tropical Paradise USA, FL

This almost sounds as if a woman was stalked by Godzilla and the wild turkey in Utah freaks-out. This has only been going on for 10 years now, I guess they took the hint. Mormon leaders have put up a virtual firewall in their massive genealogical database to block out anyone who attempts to access the names of hundreds of thousands of Holocaust victims the church has agreed not to posthumously baptize. The move comes amid criticism that the Salt Lake City-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hasn't done enough to live up to commitments to stop its members worldwide from performing the baptism ritual on Holocaust victims and other notable Jews, how can they when it's done at home not at the Church. The new system will immediately block church members' access should they try to seek out names of Holocaust victims or other notable figures that have been flagged as not suitable for proxy baptisms. The church said the move is aimed at ending the practice. Did Jesus Christ say this is ok to do in HIS Church?. It is "HE" that makes these rules.


MY Views.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

If accessing the system was through lying- then they are committing a wrong themselves. If one desires to know if names remain accessible, they should inquire of the church.

Consider this analogy.

A = Church
B = Critics
C = Those who lied to abuse the system.

Person C plants names in persons A's home, against A's policy.
Person A says "I don't have those names in my house anymore, per person B's request"
Person B breaks into the home to search the home, rather than ask permission to search.

Person A was without guilt the entire time and acted admirably to prevent abuse from Person C. Person B is now guilty of the same lying and deception that C committed in the first place. You can't justify a lie in order to prevent another person from lying. God doesn't justify lies for us, Jews, Catholics, or anyone. That's a truth we all have clear understanding and record of.

The LDS Church answers legitimate and honest requests, not liars who don't believe anyone is honest. Many think anarchy, breaking law, breaking rules, etc. is justified. I certainly don't. But one can't accept 'free society' and that doctrine of deceit simultaneously.

CougarBlue
Heber City, UT

IF Radke is indeed using members account to do this research then she is dishonest and cheating and should not be considered a Christian. This is not the behavior of a Christian. It is the antics of a hypocrite, whose soul desire is to embarrass her former Church, nothing more, nothing less.

She is typical of many former LDS who seem hell bent to try and destroy anything the Church does. They have completely lost the Spirit and now are bent on destruction. Instead of showing others how Christ-like they are through their actions, deeds and words they stoop to the lowest common denominator and use trickery and deceit to accomplish their purpose. Each of us will reap our rewards in Heaven or Hell and the same with Radke.

BYR
Woods Cross, UT

Kishkumen, no, it is not completely impossible to prevent certain names from being baptized or submitted. All one has to do is to slightly change the parameters, such as the birth year by a single year. The name is then submitted by the computer program, which is tricked. Only if someone happens to check each and every name, would it be caught and even then you have humor error. If you want the games to stop, then all the players need to stop as well so there is no game being played.

John Pack Lambert of Michigan
Ypsilanti, MI

The policy is clearly set up to prevent anyone from accessing and submitting these names. If all people who try to submit these names are kicked off the program, than who could possibly be submitting these names? Radkey's claims that this is a coverup are ludicrous. All the more so since she lacks an account so there is no way for the Church to target her.

Mayfair
City, Ut

To Ms. Radkey--perhaps you are familiar with the phrase:

Give a man (or in your case, a woman) enough rope......

EnglishAlan
Rugeley, Staffs

There are those that abuse the system though. I shared my gedcom file with a lady in Canada, who knew that I am LDS. She looked through the file, and submitted the names of my late brother and his late wife. When I asked her why she had done that her reply was, "The work needed doing, and so I did it. You should have done it quicker." I had to explain that my brother was non-LDS, and had given ME permission to have the work done, but wanted specifically one of my sons and one of my daughters to act as proxy for him and his wife. We were waiting until my daughter was Endowed and married before doing the work. When that time came, we couldn't fulfil my brother's wishes. The lady also sealed my wife's grandparents, who had divorced in very acrimonious circumstances. The Church took appropriate steps to prevent her abusing the system further. SHE broke the rules, and not the Church.

The above reasons are why the Church imposes rules, and why they occasionally have to take action to prevent such liberties. It stops the abusers, full-stop, not just Miss Radke.

Nachtmerrie_in_Brugge
Mesa, AZ

The real irony here is that by protesting proxy baptism for deceased Jews, members of the Jewish community are unwittingly acknowledging the validity of the ordinance. If the whole Joseph-Smith-gold-plates-restoration thing is a hoax or a delusion, then what's the harm? LDS temple ordinances should be meaningless to anyone who does not believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that Joseph Smith is one of his prophets.

Also ironic is thatÂat least from an LDS perspectiveÂrather than letting Anne Frank accept or reject the ordinance of baptism for herself, these protesters would presume to reject it on her behalf.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments