Why does baptism for the dead bother you?

[painted wolf]

I know a lot of people who feel that "baptism for the " is a form of spiritual grave robbing.
The Jewish community is very angered by the practice.

I had never thought to think about the actual impact that this practice had on others when I was a mormon.

wa:do

 

[spiritually inclined]

Do Mormons accept the validity of baptisms performed by members of other denominations in the Christian religion? Do they consider infant baptism valid? sprinkling?

James

 

[nutshell]

Do Mormons accept the validity of baptisms performed by members of other denominations in the Christian religion? Do they consider infant baptism valid? sprinkling?

James

No, no, and no.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

But the person who is being baptised never wished for a baptism while he/she was alive. They had their own religious beliefs, and if they didn't, they were atheists. Why should they "need" a baptism anyway?

Because they would have seen the truth. We believe that baptism is necessary for salvation. At the end of the day, it is the person/or soul of that persons choice whether they accept it or not - and yes I am talking about when they are dead. The proxy baptism isnt forcing the religion on that person it is giving them a choice to accept it if now seeing the truth they wish to accept it. Its kind of like the phrase - better to be safe than sorry. We dont know if the souls are accepting of the truth or not - I would rather one of my relatives of the choice and refuse it, then not have the choice and want it - does that make sense.

Simple analogy!
Imagine a door in front of you - you dont know what is behind that door - some people tell you its a blue room, some say its a red room, some people say its a white room, some people say the room doesnt exist. When you die you walk through that door - say if you thought it was a white room and it was clearly red -wouldnt you want a chance to redeem yourself?

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Do Mormons accept the validity of baptisms performed by members of other denominations in the Christian religion? Do they consider infant baptism valid? sprinkling?

James

No, I dont think many denominations accept other denominations baptisms - as far as methodists are concerned (thats what I was initially christened as an infant as) - I am still methodist.

 

[Panda]

It doesn't bother me. In fact I think it is a nice gesture that shows people cared for me and want to help me. It is irrelevant what I believed as I am dead. Also if it helps others grieve and get over my death then it is a better idea.

 

[jonny]

But the person who is being baptised never wished for a baptism while he/she was alive. They had their own religious beliefs, and if they didn't, they were atheists. Why should they "need" a baptism anyway?

This question is already answered in the thread. Go ahead and read it from the beginning and you'll find it.

 

[jonny]

It does bother me, greatly.
Why? I do not want my name associated with any religion. I strongly feel to have my name and reputation as being strongly anti-religion, to be associated with a religion without my consent, is rude and insulting, and a scoff at my reputation.
I am even working with a lawyer to have my name put on a "do not Baptise" list.

It isn't as if the church publishes lists of names of those who have had temple work done for the general public. In order to access the information, you need to either go to an LDS family history center or have an account on FamilySearch.org and verify that you are a member of the church. The only reason they really make these available at all is so that people don't do the same temple work over and over (and over) again.

 

[painted wolf]

I don't know, there is just something about saying.... "grandma hates that I'm a Mormon, but its ok, when she dies she will change her mind and we'll baptize her into the curch when she's in the ground."

or, "well those poor peoople who died for not converting to Christianity will get to go to heaven when we baptize them and accept Jesus."

It never quite sat right with me.

wa:do

 

[Blindinglight]

Do you think such a list would really work? Wouldn’t the Mormons just use that list as a source of names for their ritual?

Thats why I'm still working with him. Mainly over how to enforce it.

It isn't as if the church publishes lists of names of those who have had temple work done for the general public. In order to access the information, you need to either go to an LDS family history center or have an account on FamilySearch.org and verify that you are a member of the church. The only reason they really make these available at all is so that people don't do the same temple work over and over (and over) again.

But, it annoys me to the greatest lenghts that someone can say "Oh, great grandpa Eric didn't have a religion, and was a self proclaimed Anti-Christ. We must have him Baptised." And then fully against my wishes, my name is associated with that church as being baptised.
I want it to stay at a non-religious anti-christ, for both public and private records.

 

[Smoke]

No, I dont think many denominations accept other denominations baptisms - as far as methodists are concerned (thats what I was initially christened as an infant as) - I am still methodist.

Actually, a lot of denominations do. Most of the churches that practice paedobaptism will accept any water baptism performed in the name of the Trinity, and some churches that only baptize adults will accept a paedobaptism on transfer. It would be possible move from the Presbyterian Church to the Methodist Church to the Disciples of Christ to the Episcopal Church to the Lutheran Church to the United Church of Christ to the Catholic Church to the Orthodox Church, all without ever being re-baptized. (However, you'd probably be confirmed or chrismated several times along the way.)

I don't know of any trinitarian churches that accept non-trinitarian baptisms, though, or vice versa.

 

[fantome profane]

Thats why I'm still working with him. Mainly over how to enforce it.


But, it annoys me to the greatest lenghts that someone can say "Oh, great grandpa Eric didn't have a religion, and was a self proclaimed Anti-Christ. We must have him Baptised." And then fully against my wishes, my name is associated with that church as being baptised.
I want it to stay at a non-religious anti-christ, for both public and private records.

I just don’t think it would work, and I am not even sure it should. Personally I find this particular ritual disgusting, but regardless of how disgusting I find it I must support freedom of religion. Any law or sanction that prevented them from performing this ritual as they choose would be a violation of their freedom of religion. I think you are going to find it very difficult to get a court to interfere with a churches private ritual. Or at least I hope you will find it very difficult. And as much as it annoys you there are no laws that can prevent someone from saying your name.

You also have to keep in mind that the people doing this thing really believe it. These people really believe that when they are dead they are going to go someplace and meet a bunch of other dead people who will thank them for doing this thing, and then they are all going to live forever. What kind of penalty do you think would work to stop them?

 

[Ozzie]

I remember the first time I saw that one of my ancestors had been baptized by proxy in the Mormon Church -- it was a Roman Catholic great-great-grandfather of mine. I found it a little unnerving at first, and a little insulting. I remember thinking that my grandmother -- who at that time was fairly recently deceased -- wouldn't have been at all amused to see her grandfather's name in that context.

However, on reflection, I concluded that it really wasn't such a big deal, and that the Mormon interest in genealogy for religious reasons was actually to my advantage, since they made so many records more easily accessible to researchers. I also began to wonder just who had taken this step on my ancestor's behalf; it turned out to be another descendant of his, a woman of whom I had not previously been aware. I think it's very much to her credit that once we made contact, much later, she asked my permission to use my research for Temple submissions. I really don't think she was under any obligation to do so, but it was a nice gesture, and I didn't have any problem with it.

I can understand that this is a serious issue for Jews, especially where Holocaust victims are concerned, and I can sympathize with their concern. I don't understand why it should be a problem for most people, though. Since I don't believe in it, and I don't think it has any effect at all on my ancestors, what's the difference?

Are there other people who are bothered by the practice? Why?

Apart from consent issues, I think this would invariably involve dragging up a bad memory. Why would we choose to rejig something we recall as positive? Not recommended for sceptics.

 

[Blindinglight]

Personally I find this particular ritual disgusting, but regardless of how disgusting I find it I must support freedom of religion. Any law or sanction that prevented them from performing this ritual as they choose would be a violation of their freedom of religion.

And it doesn't go against mine?

 

[fantome profane]

And it doesn't go against mine?

Go against your what? Your freedom of religion? No, I don’t see how them using your name in one of their rituals would be a violation of your rights. I know it seems wrong, but the fact is there is no such right that allows you to restrict how people use your name. That is unless it involves fraud or slander, and neither really applies here. Sorry.

 

[Katzpur]

But, it annoys me to the greatest lenghts that someone can say "Oh, great grandpa Eric didn't have a religion, and was a self proclaimed Anti-Christ. We must have him Baptised." And then fully against my wishes, my name is associated with that church as being baptised.

You obviously must see a proxy baptism as having some validity. Why on earth would you believe the Church holds the power to make you a Mormon? The Church of Jesus Christ currently has about 13 million members. If we counted everyone for whom we had performed a proxy baptism as having his "name... associated with [the] church," believe me, we'd be claiming a lot more than 13 million members.

 

[Quiddity]

Saving me from going to hell? Yes, thank you.

 

[jonny]

And it doesn't go against mine?

How much are you paying your lawyer to do this?

If I were to say a prayer for you right now and write it down in my journal, would you consider that grounds for a lawsuit?

 

[Blindinglight]

How much are you paying your lawyer to do this?

I am friends with this lawyer, so I get a good discount.

I know it seems wrong, but the fact is there is no such right that allows you to restrict how people use your name. That is unless it involves fraud or slander, and neither really applies here. Sorry.

This, does raise the question of where to limit and allow overlapping situations. I myself want my rights fulfilled of not being associated with a religon in any way shape or form, why my hypothetical ancestors would.

And I will add, I am not the only person who does not want this to happen to there name. I have seen on plenty of other forums people disagreeing with this and having a desire to avoid it.

 

[jonny]

This, does raise the question of where to limit and allow overlapping situations. I myself want my rights fulfilled of not being associated with a religon in any way shape or form, why my hypothetical ancestors would.

And I will add, I am not the only person who does not want this to happen to there name. I have seen on plenty of other forums people disagreeing with this and having a desire to avoid it.

I realize what your desire is. I just want to know if there is a difference. If I pray for you and record it in my journal, would you sue me?

Also, what legal rights does a dead person have? Who would get what when someone files a lawsuit in behalf of you? Keep in mind that it is likely your family who would submit your name to the church in the first place for the purpose of having this work done.