Non confrontational question for any practicing Mormon (former mormons, please state so when posting)

[vickimonica]

Those who have had the opportunity to accept the gospel in this life and rejected it, will not get a second chance in the next life. Baptism for the dead is for those who have not had that opportunity in this life.

It is possible that temple work for the dead had not been revealed to the Book of Mormon people. Just because something is revealed to us, it does not mean that it should have been revealed to them.

Right… The “revealed” timing issue… Just like Joe Smith didn’t "reveal’ that God had spoken to him about polygamy being “OK” until 10 yrs. AFTER he “found” the golden plates. He was covering for having multiple affairs w/ other mens wives. Once Emma found out - then he “revealed” - oh, by the way - 10 yrs. ago I was also told that polygamy was OK… Why did he not speak of this initially, when he “found” the plates? He didn’t till he got caught. Can you say Tiger Woods???

 

[zerinus]

I don’t see why they can’t just go the full mile and assure you they won’t let it be done by anyone ever. That would be the best way to handle this.

Mormons? Why can’t she just get this assurance?

Because the decision is made by your descendants, not by the Church. If they decide that that is what they want to do with your name, the Church has no right to intervene.

 

[zerinus]

Zerenius,

Thanks for expressing yourself in a civil manner. I wish all Mormons would do that.

I thought they did!

 

[Anna_Scott]

Sorry, my original post had not been correctly worded. I should have said: “Baptism for the dead is only effective for those who have not had that opportunity in this life.” So even though you may be baptized by proxy by your future descendants after death, it will not do you any good if you have willfully rejected that gospel in this life.

I don’t see why they can’t just go the full mile and assure you they won’t let it be done by anyone ever. That would be the best way to handle this.

Mormons? Why can’t she just get this assurance?

Because the decision is made by your descendants, not by the Church. If they decide that that is what they want to do with your name, the Church has no right to intervene.

Zerinus,

If I write a letter to the LDS Records Division and state that no proxy work is to be done in my name, after my death; what are the chances that my request will be honored?

Do I need to make this part of my Last Will & Testament?

Will my descendants be able to override my wishes?

What can I do?

Anna

 

[vickimonica]

I formally resigned from the Mormon Church. I rejected the “Mormon Gospel” in this lifetime; yet the only thing the LDS Records Division could assure, is that no proxy rites would be performed “while I am still living.” So, one can formally reject Mormonism in life, and still have proxy rites performed and attached to one’s name in death.

Anna

Anna, I don’t think that they will baptise you “by proxy” once you are deceased. Since you have already been baptised a mormon, even though you submitted a letter of resignation, I have been told that their thinking will be something along these lines – “once she dies, she will come to her senses, and re-affirm her baptism…” No need for re-baptising.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna, I don’t think that they will baptise you “by proxy” once you are deceased. Since you have already been baptised a mormon, even though you submitted a letter of resignation, I have been told that their thinking will be something along these lines – “once she dies, she will come to her senses, and re-affirm her baptism…” No need for re-baptising.

Vickimonica,

The LDS Records Division would not give me any assurances that no proxy work would be done. The guy just said nothing would be done while I was still living. And then there was silence. He would not give me any assurance whatsoever.

I could even be sealed in a marriage. Well, you know the possibilities.

Anna

 

[vickimonica]

Vickimonica,

The LDS Records Division would not give me any assurances that no proxy work would be done. The guy just said nothing would be done while I was still living. And then there was silence. He would not give me any assurance whatsoever.

I could even be sealed in a marriage. Well, you know the possibilities.

Anna

That has to be frustating for you. I wonder how the lds records division would handle this situation if you sent them a certified letter from your attorney… All I can say is - How Dare They…

 

[twopekinguys]

It is possible that temple work for the dead had not been revealed to the Book of Mormon people. Just because something is revealed to us, it does not mean that it should have been revealed to them.

Doesn’t that sound like selective salvation?

If God loves all of his creation, why be selective on who gets the good news? Doesn’t that kind of sound like the JW’s, and their 144,000?

 

[vickimonica]

Vickimonica,

The LDS Records Division would not give me any assurances that no proxy work would be done. The guy just said nothing would be done while I was still living. And then there was silence. He would not give me any assurance whatsoever.

I could even be sealed in a marriage. Well, you know the possibilities.

Anna

This has to be so frustrating for you. I was just thinking… I wonder how the good ole’ lds records division would handle your question/request if they received a certified letter from your attorney…

 

[ParkerD]

Anna, I don’t think that they will baptise you “by proxy” once you are deceased. Since you have already been baptised a mormon, even though you submitted a letter of resignation, I have been told that their thinking will be something along these lines – “once she dies, she will come to her senses, and re-affirm her baptism…” No need for re-baptising.

Vicki Monica,
I have no idea who may have led you to believe such a thing as you put in quotes here, but if one understands that free knowledgeable choice is a primary consideration, then it is obvious that when a person has chosen to have their name removed from the membership records and thus invalidate their baptism, that they made a knowledgeable choice about it so the only time a re-baptism is considered is when the name comes to the First Presidency for review of the individual situation. This would happen for a living person or for one who has died and whose descendants have decided to submit the name. The case would need to have demonstrable evidence that a re-baptism was warranted.

Just because the person in the Membership Department may not have been familiar with this kind of matter and did not want to speak about something they didn’t have first-hand knowledge about, doesn’t mean this topic isn’t covered in instructions–it is.

 

[zerinus]

Zerinus,

If I write a letter to the LDS Records Division and state that no proxy work is to be done in my name, after my death; what are the chances that my request will be honored?

Probably zero, because as I said, the decision rests with your descendants, not with the Church.

Do I need to make this part of my Last Will & Testament?

You need to talk to your lawyer about that. He can better advise you than I can.

Will my descendants be able to override my wishes?

Probably yes! Once you are dead, you have no control over the fairs of this world.

What can I do?

Probably nothing! As I said, once you are dead you have no control over what people do here. But if you are really concerned, your best bet is to talk to a lawyer. He can better advise you if there are any legal ways of ensuring that can never happen after you are dead.

 

[twopekinguys]

Vicki Monica,
I have no idea who may have led you to believe such a thing as you put in quotes here, but if one understands that free knowledgeable choice is a primary consideration, then it is obvious that when a person has chosen to have their name removed from the membership records and thus invalidate their baptism, that they made a knowledgeable choice about it so the only time a re-baptism is considered is when the name comes to the First Presidency for review of the individual situation. This would happen for a living person or for one who has died and whose descendants have decided to submit the name. The case would need to have demonstrable evidence that a re-baptism was warranted.

Just because the person in the Membership Department may not have been familiar with this kind of matter and did not want to speak about something they didn’t have first-hand knowledge about, doesn’t mean this topic isn’t covered in instructions–it is.

Don’t you think the headquarters would be the best place to have people that are capable of answering questions?

Even if the guy in the records department couldn’t answer the question, he should have known where to direct the caller for an answer don’t you think?

Also, if the person in the records department doesn’t know the ins and outs of your church’s teachings, why is he there?

Sorry, your logic is extremely flawed with this.

 

[sablouwho]

Probably zero, because as I said, the decision rests with your descendants, not with the Church.

Zerinus, I am actually not commenting on your words above, rather, I wanted to comment on your Hubble photo in your siggy. What a beautiful photo that is!

 

[StrawberryJam]

This is troubling to me on a few levels. If there is no need for a re-baptism of a former Mormon after they die, then why are the Mormons doing it upon request of family members? And, wouldn’t this save them a lot of their precious time on earth if they did not have to do what is not even necessary?
Please explain (hopefully Zerenius?)

I have Dianiaid on ignore.

 

[zerinus]

Zerinus, I am actually not commenting on your words above, rather, I wanted to comment on your Hubble photo in your siggy. What a beautiful photo that is!

Thank you. I have got loads of those. I like to change them from time to time.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Don’t you think the headquarters would be the best place to have people that are capable of answering questions?

Even if the guy in the records department couldn’t answer the question, he should have known where to direct the caller for an answer don’t you think?

Also, if the person in the records department doesn’t know the ins and outs of your church’s teachings, why is he there?

Sorry, your logic is extremely flawed with this.

I agree it’s a mistake to put people in a position to answer phones that are not very well versed in their faith, but let me tell you this is happening everywhere. Unfortunately. You would not believe the things I have been told on the phone when attempting to contact my priest before he gave me other means to get in touch with him.

 

[dianaiad]

Vickimonica,

The LDS Records Division would not give me any assurances that no proxy work would be done. The guy just said nothing would be done while I was still living. And then there was silence. He would not give me any assurance whatsoever.

I could even be sealed in a marriage. Well, you know the possibilities.

Anna

As has been mentioned before, it will be up to your descendents. The church cannot monitor everything they do, and if one of your great=great-great-umpty great grandkids decides to do your work for you, they will.

However, it doesn’t matter. You can always say no thank you, if for some odd reason you even become aware of it.

 

[ParkerD]

Don’t you think the headquarters would be the best place to have people that are capable of answering questions?

Even if the guy in the records department couldn’t answer the question, he should have known where to direct the caller for an answer don’t you think?

Also, if the person in the records department doesn’t know the ins and outs of your church’s teachings, why is he there?

Sorry, your logic is extremely flawed with this.

I have no idea whom the caller talked with, what was said, what was understood from what was said, what may have been misunderstood, and certainly a person answering the telephone is not necessarily in a position to know every answer to every question that may be brought up to them. The channel of asking questions is supposed to be that a member asks their bishop who may ask their stake president if it’s not in the General Handbook, and a non-member may ask a local bishop or may ask the mission president where they live. This way one goes through channels where these things can be looked up and answered using what has actually been approved and researched by someone who can take the time to do it.

I’ve seen this topic in writing, so it is not guess-work. It has been written up as a specific procedure to follow.

 

[zerinus]

This is troubling to me on a few levels. If there is no need for a re-baptism of a former Mormon after they die, then why are the Mormons doing it upon request of family members?

Your questions are not very clear. I don’t recall saying that. When you reply to posts, it would be helpful if you would use the “quote” button so I know what it is you are referring to, and what your question relates to.

And, wouldn’t this save them a lot of their precious time on earth if they did not have to do what is not even necessary?
Please explain (hopefully Zerenius?)

Again, I don’t realty know what you are referring to. I can’t answer your questions if I don’t know what your question refers to.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Your questions are not very clear. I don’t recall saying that. When you reply to posts, it would be helpful if you would use the “quote” feature so I know what it is you are referring to, and what your question relates to.

Again, I don’t realty know what you are referring to. I can’t answer your questions if I don’t know what your question refers to.

Sorry, you did not make that claim, another poster did. I’ll try to find it. She said it wouldn’t matter, and that the person themselves could change their mind after death anyway I think…