Do Mormons believe that post-mortem baptism of this kind is sufficient, or efficacious, for salvation? I ask because presumably the vast majority of the people baptised after the event in this way were not themselves Mormons, so one might have thought that not having been baptised was not their only obstacle to salvation.
Ask a Mormon, Part 4
- Thread starter Eran of Arcadia
- Start date
If one accepted the post-mortem baptism, then there would not be a difference between the ordinance being conducted on earth, or beyond...it would be perfectly acceptable. We don't really have a way of knowing if a person who was baptized in proxy accepted the ordinance though.
It's the only obstacle they might have to salvation that anyone besides them and God can help them with.
I wonder if your dead ancestors baptise you pre-death? And if they hold their own baptism rituals.
Why limit this to the ancestors of LDS members? If the goal is to save as many people as possible (which I assume is the case, because there are so many missionaries. Is it?) wouldn't it make sense to posthumously baptize anyone you know the name of? Or mass-baptize any human who ever lived?
We actually try that too.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Do the leaders of your church acknowledge how offensive a practice like that is to non-Mormons?
_random_
Jewel Runner
There actually is a policy against Baptizing Holocaust victims unless their families specifically request it. That being said, I don't see why it's a big deal if they're honestly convinced they're helping people go to Heaven. Any of our Mormons care to explain how that policy came about?
No one has ever been able to provide a logical explanation to me as to why it's actually offensive, beyond "I don't like it".
The policy came about because people objected to it.
_random_
Jewel Runner
But plenty of people object to the practice of proxy baptism to begin with. As horrific as the Holocaust was, I'm not sure why it's victims merit special exception here.
useless
Social Justice Rogue
I assume then that you would be okay with other religions post-humously baptising your dead ancestors and relatives?
I'm not trying to be abrassive, I'm genuinely interested.
I'm not trying to be abrassive, I'm genuinely interested.
Well, I think that in this particular case it was how they got the names - from sources specifically related to the Holocaust, like lists of the dead or something like that.
I can't come up with any reason why it would bother me. They could pre-humously baptize ME by proxy and I wouldn't care as long as they didn't expect any further obligations on my part.
The way we see it, either the church is true, and the practice comes from God, in which case what we do helps people; or the church isn't true and the practice doesn't come from God, in which case it has no validity and doesn't affect anyone.
I'm not really sure that I have a "least favorite" part of the church as a religion, but sure, there are aspects of Mormon culture that are problematic. None of them, of course, are unique to Mormonism.
But there is sometimes social pressure to act a certain way. For example, a woman who isn't married, or who is married and doesn't have kids, or has kids and works outside the home, is not breaking any church rules, but she is acting differently from most Mormon women, and might find herself the recipient of snide comments.
And even speaking as a somewhat politically conservative person myself, I don't like how too many members see the Republican Party and Mormonism as sort of synonymous - it's not good for either the faith or the party to think like that.
And apparently, Mormons can be a pretty insular bunch. Having lived around mostly non-members my whole life, and finding it easier to make friends with members than non-members, I haven't had a problem with this, but from what I hear, non-Mormons in Utah have a lot of trouble making friends.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Really? I would be offended if some group of people who believe things I do not held a ceremony to induce my grandfather into their church... post mortem.
It's as offensive as forcing someone to join a church or any sort of group against their will - without their consent.
Get consent from the person you want to baptize and it's not offensive at all. If you do it without consent.. it's really really offensive.
Well, if we really aren't the true church as we claim, then our baptisms for the dead have no authority and the end result is that we haven't caused the person to join the church.
And we believe that even after we have someone baptized, it is still completely up to them to accept or reject it as they choose, in the next life.
So it really isn't like forced conversion in any way,
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
It remains quite offensive to me and a lot of other people.
You can't just sign up people who have died to organizations they may or may not have agreed with. If you have their consent is fine, but without it, nope.. not cool. It doesn't matter that/if you guys are right or wrong about Mormonism or whatever. That is beside the point.
People have mouths and ears for a reason - talk to them before they die and try to get them to join your church. Anything else is disrespectful.
Why is it disrespectful?
The whole point of the practice is that we are reaching out to people who didn't have a chance to accept the church. It's not like you can say that every person who died as a non-Mormon specifically considered and then rejected it.
If we are right, then it matters a lot, because we are providing something that they need. if we are wrong, then what we did affects them in no way whatsoever.
And it's hardly like there are no other churches that baptize people who haven't given their explicit consent.
The whole point of the practice is that we are reaching out to people who didn't have a chance to accept the church. It's not like you can say that every person who died as a non-Mormon specifically considered and then rejected it.
If we are right, then it matters a lot, because we are providing something that they need. if we are wrong, then what we did affects them in no way whatsoever.
And it's hardly like there are no other churches that baptize people who haven't given their explicit consent.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Because the guy is dead. He is unable to join any new organizations anymore. His life is over.
By posthumously signing him up for the hitler youth, a manchester united fan club, or mormonism, or WHATEVER, you are implying that he endorsed these organizations in some way.
That's why it's offensive and disrespectful to his memory. The guy's made all his choices. Don't make any new ones for him. It's not your place.
Ah, the "everyone else is doing it" excuse. Nope, not good enough
Bestbank Tiger
Deity
I'm not LDS and I'm not offended by it.
