Question for LDS "Do you Marry the dead?"

[Peter_John]

Well said Sojo and I agree. It is very disrespectful that the LDS church is invalidating another person’s religious belief.

In America, they are covered under the religious freedom laws. But, where is your’s and my religious freedom?

I think the LDS should honor my wishes and take off the family names. I have requested. If my grand parents were still living. There is no way on God’s earth they would have become Mormons. Both recieved the sacrament of baptism as infants and were devout Christians.

Affirming that their practice invalidates your beliefs only serves to validate their own. If your beliefs are valid, their belief is clearly invalid, and can do nothing to invalidate yours.

Like I said: DOn’t get mad, get even! Pray Rosaries for them and post names of those for whom you pray. Have masses said for even living LDS relatives, and invite them. Maybe a Mormon seeing a mass said on their own behalf would change the way they perceive mass.

The list of names they have is actually a general geneology. It asserts your ancestors place among the whole descendancy of the human race as they have catalogued it. Do you want them removed from that, or just from the list of those from whom ordinances have been performed?

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,
I disagree. I don’t want Mormon rites or their prayers to a god who is an exalted man. IOW, I don’t want pagan prayers offered for me or my family.
Anna

That’s too bad. How others perceive God does not alter his nature. The other “gods” do not even exist, and hear nothing, but God knows the intents of the heart when people pray. Even if their perception of deity is inaccurate, his grace is sufficient to answer desires of their heart, particularly those for others.

Personally, I need the prayers of everyone I know, to whomever or whatever they may think they pray. A false god can’t hurt me. If God recognizes a prayer out of love for me to a falsely perceived deity as intended for himself, and happens to intercept it, it can only help me.

 

[lax16]

They do marry the dead, that is couples who were married in life but not married in the temple. They perform this for time and all eternity so they may have the option oif choosing. I recall some talk and indication from my years of study and attendance that they at least used to seal women who died single to authorities of the Church, again subject to acceptance in the afterlife. I cannot confirm this an actual practice, though it at least appears to have been experimented with back in the days of isolation in Utah.

The tough part with arguing the overal practice of proxy ordinances is that when the policies are followed it can do nothing to infringe on the religious rights of the person who has died, but restricting it infringes on what the living LDS relatives consider a religious responsibility – that is when it is done right.

I agree with those who say oversight fails, as indicated by my cousin’s experience drawing my LDS grandfather’s name.

Okay, but my question is this:

in the case of Blessed John Paul II and Blessed Mother Theresa…would they be married to someone in order to achieve the highest level of heaven? The were baptized, confirmed, then…???

Why stop there?

 

[lax16]

That’s too bad. How others perceive God does not alter his nature. The other “gods” do not even exist, and hear nothing, but God knows the intents of the heart when people pray. Even if their perception of deity is inaccurate, his grace is sufficient to answer desires of their heart, particularly those for others.

Personally, I need the prayers of everyone I know, to whomever or whatever they may think they pray. A false god can’t hurt me. If God recognizes a prayer out of love for me to a falsely perceived deity as intended for himself, and happens to intercept it, it can only help me.

But perhaps if the busy bodies stopped performing all of these rituals and geneological searches and they had time to think…

they would realize they need to do something with their lives as Jesus commanded - feed the hungry, visit the imprisoned…etc.

By the Jews, Catholics, and Protestants putting an end to this busy-ness they would be forced to change their ways. Really, there aren’t enough Mormons to keep them busy. They have to focus on non-LDS to keep it all going.

 

[TheExorcist]

But perhaps if the busy bodies stopped performing all of these rituals and geneological searches and they had time to think…

they would realize they need to do something with their lives as Jesus commanded - feed the hungry, visit the imprisoned…etc.

By the Jews, Catholics, and Protestants putting an end to this busy-ness they would be forced to change their ways. Really, there aren’t enough Mormons to keep them busy. They have to focus on non-LDS to keep it all going.

That’s the thing, many Mormons consider temple work to be the greatest or at least the holiest work they can do. In fact they believe that at the second coming of Christ that he will reign on Earth for 1000 years while all of this work is finished.

Don’t get me wrong, Mormons devote ENORMOUS resources to the poor and hungry and in humanitarian causes. They have a rather extensive prison ministry system as well.

So it’s not like they DON’T do other things. They just have an incorrect approach to the concept of Apostolic Succession and Priesthood among other things.

 

[Inishfree]

Affirming that their practice invalidates your beliefs only serves to validate their own. If your beliefs are valid, their belief is clearly invalid, and can do nothing to invalidate yours.

Like I said: DOn’t get mad, get even! Pray Rosaries for them and post names of those for whom you pray. Have masses said for even living LDS relatives, and invite them. Maybe a Mormon seeing a mass said on their own behalf would change the way they perceive mass.

The list of names they have is actually a general geneology. It asserts your ancestors place among the whole descendancy of the human race as they have catalogued it. Do you want them removed from that, or just from the list of those from whom ordinances have been performed?

Thank you for the advise. I will do just that. I only know one person who is a convert to the LDS. And she is in a nursing home. I will certainly pray for her. The last time, I paid her a visit. She wanted the Holy Bible. I found it for her.

I’m not sure if any ordinances were performed. She just went to a mormon center one time. Where geneology was done, open to the public… The rest of my family refused to take part in this and she never went back.

Thanks again and God bless.

 

[KathleenGee]

As I prepare to go to sleep tonight…the only comment I do protest is that John Paul II is not a member of the Mormon church…as they contend…

Mormons and Catholics should read JPII’s book, ‘Threshold of Hope’…to show where his true membership is…

We pray for the conversion of sinners, pray for the perseverance of the just…and the souls in purgatory…and those include the Mormons…all for Christ.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I said more tight than they used to be. They used to get the lists and start the baptisms.

If there is no checking, demonstrated by the fact that people who aren’t supposed to be on a list are still being baptized and those who don’t follow the rules have no consequences for their actions then there is nothing tight about the new policies. The LDS church has no intention of living up to it’s words just as before. There has been no actual tightening only empty promises.

 

[Peter_John]

As I prepare to go to sleep tonight…the only comment I do protest is that John Paul II is not a member of the Mormon church…as they contend…

Mormons and Catholics should read JPII’s book, ‘Threshold of Hope’…to show where his true membership is…

We pray for the conversion of sinners, pray for the perseverance of the just…and the souls in purgatory…and those include the Mormons…all for Christ.

KAthleen, they do not contend that Pope John Paul II is now Mormon. Some members may present it that way, but I cited in other responses that they afirm they have no way of knowing if someone accepts the temple work done on their behalf. The Mormon Church does not and cannot consider him Mormon.

 

[KathleenGee]

Peter John,

I was looking at one Temple that said he was now a member…in San Diego…so it is only in that temple…not the official Mormon church considering him a member?

Yes, I was thinking this baptizing was to hasten Christ’s coming…but from another source, I also read that although organizations tell them to please stop doing that, they say they don’t then are exposed continuing to do so anyway.

John Paul II being now a member of the Mormon church set me off…sounded like it was accepted universally if one temple claimed that.

 

[rock17]

Peter John,
Your attitude toward this is all wrong, they are changing history everytime they put someone on to the roll am I right? And if it is not baptism as you where stating earlier than they should change the name. I can tell you this whenever they take someone who showed no interest in being Mormon while alive and actually was the opposite (JP2) than they are going against everyones trust, Especially when they claim to have regulations to protect the wrong thing from happening.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,
Your attitude toward this is all wrong, they are changing history everytime they put someone on to the roll am I right?

That is not an accurate statement.They do not add the names of those for whom Baptisms for the Dead are performed to their membership rosters. Nothing they do changes any of the life stories or choices of those for whom they perform the work. Mormons believe that having this work done for non-LDS relatives who die – most specifically those who never heard of Mormonism in life – is an important personal responsibility they have before God.

In fact they preserve history. They do not alter any records, and specifically preserve any of the records they collect for genealogical purposes. These include stacks of civil records, birth records, death records. In places old enough to lack civil recordings they use baptismal records from churches.They also come from research performed into individual family members backgrounds. You do not have to go too many generations back, though, until we are all relatives.

They keep microfilm and I am sure now digital copies of all of these records in a tunnel so deep in a mountain in Utah that an Atom bomb could land on top of it and it would probably not even shake the vaults where they keep the records. They make copies available through branch genealogical libraries all over the world so that anyone can access any of the records they have and learn about their ancestors. Before they started doing this people had to contact different jurisiductions around the world to trace their lineage.

And if it is not baptism as you where stating earlier than they should change the name. I can tell you this whenever they take someone who showed no interest in being Mormon while alive and actually was the opposite (JP2) than they are going against everyones trust,

They have two different names. “Baptism” and “Baptism for the Dead”. Baptism can be performed in any body of water deep enough for total immersion, but is usually performed in fonts in regular community meeting houses. Baptism for the Dead can only be performed in temples, in fonts which represent as being supported on the back of 12 bulls.

Baptism brings admission to the Church oif Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Baptism for the Dead does not. The names of those dead on whose behalf some living Mormon has been baptized are not added to Church membership rolls. If the person for whom the work is done does not accept it in the next life, it does nothing according to LDS teachings.

Since John Paul II declared LDS baptism invalid in 2001, I doubt he will accept baptism for the dead on his behalf now. Since he was very ecumeniucal, and very understanding, I bet he appreciates prayers for him in any form.

Especially when they claim to have regulations to protect the wrong thing from happening.

I expect that rules get disregarded, ignored, or overlooked from time to time. I’m sure they find any loopholes they think they can justify. They believe that this has to be doine for everyone who ever lived and did not receive a persoanl witness of the truth of their faith from the Holy Ghost in this life. It does not mean they will accept it in the next life, but it gives them the opportunity. They believe it will take a thousand years after Jesus returns to complete this work, so right now they are really just practicing, since they can’t even keep up with the birth rate.

I do understand why it bothers people, and if after all I have written it still bothers people I can’t help that. There really is nothing to stop it. The names are public record, and they do not even need to acknowledge publicly that it is done to continue the work.

So, I simply suggest strategies for learning to live with it. First, recognize it is well-intentioned. Second, recognize it changes nothing about your ancestors. Third, recognize that at worst it can do nothing. Fourth, recognize they do not list those in whose names people are baptized for the dead as members of their church.

Fifth – Don’t get Mad – Get Even! Schedule masses on behalf of LDS dead. Schedule masses on behalf of LDS living, and get them to go! Pray Rosaries with rosaries blessed by the Bishop at a Eucharistic Congress, under the terms described in the Handbook of Indulgences, earn a plenary indulgence, and pray for the Lord to apply it to some deceased Mormon – or some living Mormon for that matter.

Mormons are not the only ones who can do work for the dead. Catholics have been doing it a lot longer.

 

[Peter_John]

Peter John,

I was looking at one Temple that said he was now a member…in San Diego…so it is only in that temple…not the official Mormon church considering him a member?

Yes, I was thinking this baptizing was to hasten Christ’s coming…but from another source, I also read that although organizations tell them to please stop doing that, they say they don’t then are exposed continuing to do so anyway.

John Paul II being now a member of the Mormon church set me off…sounded like it was accepted universally if one temple claimed that.

I would need to see the specific refeerence you found to comment. It sounds as if it was either spun sensationalistically by a journalist, or announced inappropriately by some temple worker. It is not something that the Church generally makes it a point to publicize. there is really no great achievement in immersing someone on behalf of someone everybody knows lived and when. The achievement for them is in finding the records of people everyone has forgotten about, and where they fit into the human family.

That is where I think the real beauty of this practice fits in, they are putting together a huge catalog of one giant family in which we all have a recognized place. If God needs them to believe they are doing something concrete to create this ideological benefit, who am I to argue?

I do understand why it could upset some people, but there is really little recourse. You can waste a lot of energy fighting someone’s good intentions in performing an act of no effect at the worst.

Maybe Blessed John Paul II should be dedicated as a Patron Saint of Mormons (though personally, I think Augustine most suitable, as he converted from a Christian heresy).

 

[KathleenGee]

Thanks Peter John,

I agree with you…nobody is going to stop them. And seeing the kindness of Mormon people…yes, I would also agree with you they are well-intentioned.

So thanks for clarifying that baptism does not equal membership. That would be fraud and looney. I am not concerned about them baptizing me.

I do not like it when they say they have stopped targeting a certain group…but then go on.

The link I gave regarding the baptisms included a statement below saying he was a member of the Church…but it looked like it was referring to one particular temple claiming that…what I also brought up.

I encourage ‘Threshold of Hope’, by JPII to read, because he affirms and speaks for all humanity. He also clarifies as well many issues of today, as well as his own role, and what is all entailed in the ‘Vicar of Christ’.

 

[lax16]

Okay, but my question is this:

in the case of Blessed John Paul II and Blessed Mother Theresa…would they be married to someone in order to achieve the highest level of heaven? The were baptized, confirmed, then…???

Why stop there?

Hi Parker - maybe I will direct this question to you.

thanks!

 

[lax16]

That’s the thing, many Mormons consider temple work to be the greatest or at least the holiest work they can do. In fact they believe that at the second coming of Christ that he will reign on Earth for 1000 years while all of this work is finished.

Don’t get me wrong, Mormons devote ENORMOUS resources to the poor and hungry and in humanitarian causes. They have a rather extensive prison ministry system as well.

So it’s not like they DON’T do other things. They just have an incorrect approach to the concept of Apostolic Succession and Priesthood among other things.

I am sure this is true. However, doesn’t baptizing the dead contradict the teachings of the Book of Mormon?

Baptisms for the dead do not appear in the BoM as far as I know.

Alma 34:35-36: “For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance even until death, behold ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he does seal you his. Therefore, the spirit of the Lord has withdrawn from you and hath no place in you; the power of the devil is over you, and this is the final state of the wicked.”

2 Nephi 9:15: “And it shall come to pass that when all men shall have passed from this first death unto life, insomuch as they have become immortal, they must appear before the judgment seat of the Holy One of Israel, and then cometh the judgment and then must they be judged according to the holy judgment of God. For the Lord God hath spoken it, and it is his eternal word, which cannot pass away, that they who are righteous shall be righteous still, and they who are filthy shall be filthy still; wherefore, they who are filthy . . . shall go away into everlasting fire, prepared for them; and their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end.”

 

[RebeccaJ]

Mormons are millennialists, holding to a belief that the return of Christ will usher in 1000 years (literally) of temple work, where dead and resurrected Mormons will do temple work for everyone who has ever lived. THEN comes this judgement that is described in the BoM.

 

[lax16]

Mormons are millennialists, holding to a belief that the return of Christ will usher in 1000 years (literally) of temple work, where dead and resurrected Mormons will do temple work for everyone who has ever lived. THEN comes this judgement that is described in the BoM.

Thanks for the explanation, Rebecca!

 

[rock17]

Thank you for clarifying about the who is on the lds rolls PeterJohn it does make it better, I am not mad I am just confused on why they would say they would not do something or completely disregard the wishes of people of the Jewish faith and many others. So this they are not hurting anyone may be true in the sense that they are really not doing anything other than LYING! and your comment about how baptism of the dead is differnet than just regular baptism is hard to understand, both are baptising souls are they not? And your parralells between praying for someone and baptising them are not correct. But if you wish to take this stance that nothing is wrong with not being truthful about what one is doing in the name of someones realative than that is your opinion but my opinion is that I would rather they pray for my family member but not perform a ritual with a kid standing in as a proxy in thier name.

 

[KathleenGee]

Rock,

Sympathize totally…but I am beginning to see that perhaps even their baptisms are not the same thing either…ours incorporates us into the living presence of Christ, the foundation of our faith.

But it sounds like a compulsion on their part…considering their beliefs…