Gandhi doing Namaste
(CHAKRA) Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, in a statement in Nevada (USA) today, said that it was appalling to note that Gandhi, who lived his life as a Hindu and was cremated by Hindu traditions, had been reportedly baptized by proxy by LDS. It was insensitive and hurtful to the feelings of about one billion Hindus spread worldwide.
Independent researcher Helen Radkey of Salt Lake City, in an email to Zed, who is President of Universal Society of Hinduism, sent pages from FamilySearch, an LDS service, which showed Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (Person Identifier LHTR-62Z; born October 2, 1869 in Porbandar & died January 30, 1948 in New Delhi) as baptized on March 27, 1996 at Salt Lake City Utah Temple; with “Confirmation” completed November 17, 2007 at Sao Paulo Brazil Temple; “Initiatory” completed February four, 2009 at Sao Paulo Brazil Temple; and “Endowment” completed October two, 1996 at Salt Lake City Utah Temple. It also lists names of Gandhi’s siblings, parents and children.
In this email to Rajan Zed, Radkey said that she looked up this record on February 16 but it had since disappeared and was no longer available in the database. Person Identifier LHTR-62Z pulled up as “Unknown Name”. It was unusual for a record to vanish, she added.
Emails sent by Zed to LDS officials carrying short letter addressed to LDS President Thomas S. Monson on February 24 have remained unanswered till now. In this “information request”, Zed asked whether it was a fact that Gandhi had been baptized by proxy by LDS; how many other deceased Hindus had been baptized by proxy without the will/request of their living relatives; was it the current/past LDS policy to baptize Hindu ancestors without the will/request of the living relatives and would this policy continue in future also.
After the recent news of posthumous baptizing of Jewish rights advocate Simon Wiesenthal’ s parents, prominent Jewish victim Anne Frank (Diary of a Young Girl) and now Mahatma Gandhi reports, we were highly concerned and wonder how many of our ancestors had been baptized by LDS without our will, Rajan Zed argued.
Zed further said that President Monson should himself apologize for this and explain how this happened. Monson should also come-out with detailed report on how many Hindus had been baptized without the will or request of their living relatives. Proxy baptism of our ancestors, who lived and died as Hindus, was simply not acceptable.
If it was just an “accident”, then LDS needed to come-up with a mechanism and some “effective” safeguards so that mistakes, errors, breaches and misunderstandings did not happen in the future in the area of proxy baptisms involving non-LDS ancestors, Rajan Zed stated.
Zed noted that Hindus and most probably other faith communities worldwide would be willing to work with LDS to build bridges of understanding. He pointed out that they would gladly support the LDS endeavors if they made a good-faith effort and organized a meeting of various religious groups to help them set up such a mechanism.
Rajan Zed explained that Hindus did not mark death as the end of existence. Ancient Hindu scripture Bhagavad-Gita (Song of the Lord) referred to death as abandoning of worn-out clothes and acquiring new ones. Hindus believed in reincarnation with moksha (liberation) as a goal; which brought end to rebirth, embodiment and death.
Zed stressed that ancestors had always been highly important in Hinduism since ancient times. Hindus followed sraddha, pitryajna, pinda, etc., rituals for their ancestors. It would be really painful for Hindus if they came to know that somebody unrelated performed some rites on their ancestors without even asking them.
Hinduism was the oldest and third largest religion of the world with a rich philosophical thought and it should not be taken lightly. Any faith, larger or smaller, should not be mishandled, Rajan Zed added.
According to reports, Catholics had also objected such baptism of their members and even Republican American presidential front-runner Mitt Romney’s atheist father-in-law Edward Davies was posthumously baptized. FamilySearch claims to be the largest genealogy organization in the world and runs a Family History Library in Salt Lake City.
Official LDS website says that the foundation of the doctrine of baptism for the dead comes from latter-day revelation through Prophet Joseph Smith. “By standing in as proxy for someone who has died — often one of his or her own ancestors — a Church member may be baptized on behalf of that deceased person…Lord does not damn those people who, through no fault of their own, never had the opportunity for baptism. He has therefore authorized baptisms to be performed by proxy for them…The validity of a baptism for the dead depends on the deceased person accepting it and choosing to accept and follow the Savior while residing in the spirit world”. Baptisms for the dead are performed only in temples because of sacredness involved and the ceremony reportedly involves immersion in water while dressed in white clothing.
According to LDS sources, Jesus Christ is the head of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which has been restored by God through Joseph Smith (1805-44). One of the fastest growing church, LDS is led by 15 Apostles, including President Monson (who is also considered a prophet); first and second Counselors Henry B. Eyring and Dieter F. Uchtdorf respectively; and President of The Quorum of the Twelve Boyd K. Packer. LDS, also known as Mormon Church, which claims to be a Christian denomination, has 134 temples and a membership of over 14 million. Republican Romney is a Mormon and so is United States Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
One of the greatest moral and political leaders of the 20th century, Mahatma Gandhi was Time Person of the Year in 1930 and was runner-up for Time Person of the Century.
what if ANY OTHER RELIGION went and performed some posthumous rituals on Jesus Christ and had him “officially” made something non Christian? Do you know how many people would shit bricks all over the place?
This is ridiculous
The reason Mormons are baptizing Hindus into their faith is to save them from going to hell. The Mormon ‘bible’ states that they can only go to heaven if they have become Mormon.
I quote:
“If it had not been for Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is NO salvation outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – the Mormons.” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670).
So they are doing you a favour
I am a believing, active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS or Mormon).
Vicarious work for the dead was initiated under God’s direction by the early Christians (1 Corinthians 15:29). The deceased individuals for whom the work is done are free to accept or reject it. They cannot be compelled to do so. We don’t know their present desires, so we need to respect their right to decide for themselves now what they accept and what they reject.
If this invitation by the Church doesn’t actually have validity before God, then it is a waste of our time and money. If, as we believe, this invitation is valid in the sight of God and those deceased have the God-given choice to accept or reject it, then it is even more important to let them to decide for themselves what they will do.
Phillip C. Smith, Ph.D.
“Mormons” (members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) baptize the living for the dead because we follow Jesus’ teaching, “Except a man be born of water and the spirit [baptism], he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). “Mormons” believe in three heavens; baptism is necessary only for the highest heaven. Instead of being offended, Hindus should be flattered that some Mormon who performed this baptism thought that Mahatma Ghandi was worthy of the highest heaven and should be offered the opportunity to accept the baptism. Of course, Mormons do not believe that any person will be compelled to accept the baptism or become a “Mormon”–this is always up to the decision of the person for whom the baptism was performed.
Tom Johnson
> Hindus and most probably other faith communities worldwide would be willing to work with LDS to build bridges of understanding.<
Does this work both ways? Will they try to understand us?
You must remember, that Helen Radkey could not care less about your feelings, all she wants is to make as much trouble for the LDS church as she possibly can.
I find it outrageous for members of the Mormon Church to go outside of their religion and proxy baptize people who are not believers of their faith. This is demonstrating a total disregard for the rights of believers of other faiths. To think that this same church also proxy baptized Adolf Hitler and puts him on the list along with Gandhi, Simon Weisenthal and potentially members of my own family is sickening beyond belief. How does one find out who is being listed? Please advise. Thank you.
all dead mormons are gay!
Aside from the fact that they’ve got a lot of nerve to impose their religion on non-believing families,
having been to Salt Lake City, I can strongly state that the Mormon idea of heaven is none too appetizing. I was also told by a (Mormon) friend that Mohammed was recently baptized into the Mormon church.
Two good reasons not to be baptized into their church, alive or dead.
When we perform vicarious baptisms, we are NOT, repeat, NOT baptizing anyone “INTO the Mormon faith”. We believe that those who have died have the same freedom of choice that they had in life. We merely give them a choice that they might not have had in life. If they do not want to accept said baptism done in their name, and on their behalf, they can reject it. Of course, some will not get a chance, because they already rejected it in life.
Again, we are not forcing something on someone. On the contrary, we are giving them something they might not have ever had; a CHOICE.
All the excuses written here by members of the LDS Church to explain why their church conducts these rituals without permission from the descendants, without understanding that religion is an individual’s choice to make is incredibly offensive. LindaSDF wrote, “We believe that those who have died have the same freedom of choice that they had in life.” Well, that is fine and dandy if you and your flock want to believe that, but it is sheer arrogance and disrespect for people of other faiths to assume that the only salvation is through belief in your religious teachings. You are imposing your values on others without regards to their descendants. That is unacceptable and exceedingly disrespectful. It is not your business to posthumously give the dead choices. That is no different desecrating people’s graves and the memory of those people. This is no different than forced conversions by Roman Catholics in the Middle Ages. This is the kind of behavior that violates our Constitutional amendment that we as individuals make choices and others must not infringe on individual rights. You’ve pushed the envelope one step too far.
What I feel is even worse is the disrespect shown to believers of Hinduism with the proxy baptism of Babu Gandhi. If this is not a classic example of the Ugly American, I don’t know what is. It is bad enough that adherents of the LDS are conducting these rituals on Jews in America and globally, but to involve another religion that is not part of the related 3 monotheistic religions is offensive. If there are attacks on Christians in India as a result of this, the members of the LDS only have themselves to blame.
Kerry,
There is no disrespect intended to Hindus. You should not take offense where no offense is intended. You are wrong to assume that the baptism was submitted or performed by an “ugly American.” The “Mormon” religion is established in 170 countries, including India. Any member of the church can submit a name for baptism. Maybe Gandhi’s name was submitted by an Indian member of our church. “Mormons” believe all people are God’s children, so we don’t discriminate against Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, or Moslems. Why are you so upset–the name Kelly Berger does not sound like an Indian name. However, when I read you talking about attacks on Christians because you don’t believe the same way as “Mormons” do, you sound like a Muslim.
Tom
@Tom Johnson, what you fail to understand is that what YOU believe about all God’s children may not be what others feel, and it is disrespectful, dishonest to unilaterally conduct rituals on believers of another faith WITHOUT their permission, whether alive or dead. If someone decided to conduct a ritual that inducted your family members into devil worshiping (as an example) how would YOU feel and react? It’s no different. I would say your excuses for justifying this are equally as obnoxious as what all religious extremists do. They violate the rights of others by imposing their religion. Jews do not go about proselytizing others. We are proud of our faith and to disrespect us in this manner is unconscionable and unacceptable. It doesn’t matter whether or not I’m Indian, and a Mormon Indian who submits the name of Gandhi is just itching to put fuel on a religious fire. Your lack of sensitivity on how others might feel about your practices and not recognizing that you are IMPOSING your faith on others (directly and indirectly) is a sad reminder of how many religious people can’t comprehend how imposing one’s faith on others infringes on the other party’s rights, and that these same people push the envelope on freedom of religion in a manner inconsistent with American values and constitutional law. Try thinking about it a little before responding.
Kerry: the Holy Bible calls you Jews the ‘synagogue of Satan’ because you crucified God’s Son and your Messiah. As a result you have rejected both The Almighty God and His Anointed One, as a result you need the Mormons to baptize you into their faith so you can make it into heaven.
@William — and you are a raving anti-Semite. Even the Catholic Church recognizes that it was the Romans responsible for the death of Jesus (who, by the way, was a JEWISH Rabbi, not a Christian). For readers of this journal, The Chakra, they will see that you are a mentally sick person and I most certainly would never want to be baptized into your church particularly since you represent the worst form of bigotry in existence. I’m certain most Hindus will not be impressed with your vulgar comments.
Jesus may be your Messiah, William, but he is not ours. And if your Messiah is as bigoted as you are, I wouldn’t want to have anything to do with him as far as I am concerned. You give a bad name to your religion and to being a disrespectful, Ugly American.
Kelly,
“William” is not a “Mormon” and I agree that his comments are anti-Semitic, so don’t blame the “Mormons” for what he says.
What should we do, Kerry, when we believe Jesus Christ has given us modern day commandments to offer the gospel of Jesus Christ to all who will listen and to offer baptism to those who have died when you feel that it is disrespectful to do so? We all know there are many different religions with conflicting religious beliefs. Your example is a good one–Jews don’t proselyte, but Christians, including Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Mormons have always proselyted. Are all of us supposed to do what you want us to do because that’s what Jews do? You say we are conducting rituals on believers in another faith. Do you realize that we don’t know the faith of 95% of the people who have died? Even if they were practicing a particular religion during their life and we have a record of that, you do not know what their faith is now in the spirit world. How are Mormons supposed to know who is a “Jew” when a name is submitted for baptism? Do you realize that almost all of the baptisms for the dead that have been submitted for Jews have been done by Jews who have converted to the “Mormon” faith? Finally, no matter how many times you use the word, “Mormons” are not IMPOSING their religion on anyone by offering a departed spirit the opportunity to accept a baptism for them.
Tom Johnson
Tom, I appreciate your response. At least you are being civil. However I must make a rebuttal. Firstly, my name is Kerry (with double R’s), not Kelly with L’s. Secondly, what you believe is fine with me as long as you DON’T impose your beliefs and values on me, my person, or my family and my descendants. It is the responsibility of your Church and its followers to find out what faith a person belongs when it collects death certificates or names for proxy baptisms. That means doing the due diligence to investigate, locate and contact the descendants of the deceased. If no one can be found, then your church should NEVER unilaterally conduct a proxy baptism. You folks are just setting yourselves up for well deserved criticism and bad feelings. Yes, research may be an involved process, but it’s a gross excuse on your part for not making that effort. Thirdly, you are also grossly mistaken in thinking that Mormons are NOT imposing their religion on others. You definitely are disrespecting others who don’t believe in offering departed spirits an opportunity to accept a baptism for them by conducting this ritual. Jews, for instance, do not believe in an afterlife, so it is offensive and disrespectful towards the living when people conduct such an act on OUR dead. That is an imposition of your faith on another human being, and that is an infringement on another’s rights. You seem to forget that respect works both ways. If you expect others to respect your beliefs, then you MUST respect ours. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and not force yourselves on us thinking you are doing us a favor. You are NOT! I am just one person who feels extremely strongly on this subject, but there are many other people of different faiths and non-religious who feel the same way. Consequently, it behooves you that the LDS make that extra effort not only to research each person and his/her descendants, and not simply rely on a local believer who submits a name for consideration, as in the case, perhaps, of Gandhi. To make it visual for you, this act of posthumous baptism is the moral equivalent of desecrating a grave or a human body of a stranger. Your church has NO rights to infringe upon the souls of believers of other religions, irrespective of your desire to save souls. That simply is not civil behavior. It is disrespectful and hurtful. This kind of act may have been perceived in years past, but I’m sorry in an age of high speed communications and to prevent misunderstandings among various religions and peoples of the world, it has no place in today’s 21st century society.
Kerry,
First, I do apologize for mis-spelling your name. Second, I believe you are being civil also; otherwise, I would not continue to communicate with you. Third, you may find this very ironic–the reason I am a “Mormon” today is that a Jew, Norman Rothman, converted to Mormonism and he converted me when I lived in Chicago. I have the greatest respect for Jews. “Mormons” believe that Jews are the tribe of Judah and that they had the responsiblity for teaching the gospel to the world before the first coming of the Messiah. We also believe that most Mormons are descendants of the tribe of Ephraim (Joseph) and that we have the responsiblity of taking the gospel to the world prior to the second coming of the Messiah. We believe that both groups will have certain important blessings in the judgment day for carrying out their responsiblities. I think you would be very interested to learn what is said about the Jews in the Book of Mormon and in the revelations of Jesus Christ to Joseph Smith. Fourthly, when you say it is being disrespectful to perform baptisms for the dead for Jews because they don’t believe in an after-life you must be speaking just for yourself. Here is what I found in a book, Life’s Three Greatest Questions:
Jews believe in the “Olam Haba”–the world to come. The morning prayer is:
May it be Thy will, Lord our God and God of our fathers,
that we keep Thy statutes and commandments in this
world, and be worthy of inheriting the life of goodness and
blessing in the world to come.
Rabbi Judah taught, “The true reward of the good is reserved for the future life.” At the funeral of an Orthodox Jew, the mourners circle the coffin seven times and pray:
Have mercy we pray Thee on this Thy son….
In new realms of life may he now progress…
Be opened before him celestial gates
To enter God’s realm where the good have life.
May guardian angels receive him there…
His soul led by angels to Machpelah
Go thence to God’s garden of future life
Where Israel’s saints shall be welcoming
His soul as he rises to destined life.
In regard to resurrection, the Old Testament refers to a resurrection in several
different places. (Ezekiel 37:1-12; Job 14:14; 19:26; Isaiah 26:19). When Jews are buried, even outside of Israel, some earth from Israel (“Terra Santa”) is sprinkled over their body in the coffin because the “resurrection will commence” in Israel. In the days of mourning following the funeral, the “Tsidduk
Hadin” (Justification of the Divine Decree [of Death]) is recited in part as follows:
He will utterly destroy death forever…
Thy dead shall live again, The mortal being shall rise up;
Awake and sing joyously, ye that dwell in the dust,
For as the reviving dew on grass shall be thy dew,
When earth shall bring forth her dead.
On visiting a grave a part of the prayer offered is:
You have passed to the world of goodness, a world of holy
spirit. May the Lord hasten your uprising, and when our
time comes, may we meet you in the glorious, effulgent
celestial world of the spirit.
According to Rabbi Eleazar Hakappar, “They who are born will die, but the dead
shall be revived and all living are to be judged, to become aware, to know and to make
known that He is God….” Rabbi Simeon ben Zemah Duran referred to both a world of
“souls” after death, and the resurrection, which would come later. Rabbi Moses ben
Maimon (Maimonides) apparently did not think everyone would be resurrected:
And they [referring to the ‘Sages of blessed memory’] also
say that at the Resurrection the Lord, blessed be, He will not
revive those who are of a proud disposition.
Rabbi Machsor Vitry seemed to agree:
The ones who will be resurrected will be brought to judgment
when the Day of Judgment in the Valley of Jehosephat arrives.
Rabbi Akabya ben Mahalalel said:
Ponder on three things and thou wilt not come into the power
of sin: Know whence thou comest, whither thou art going, and
before Whom thou art destined to give an accounting. Whence
thou comest? From a fetid drop. Whither thou art going? To
the place of dust and worms. Before Whom thou art destined
to give an accounting? Before the supreme King of kings, the
Holy One, blessed be He.
Rabbi Rashi taught:
Man is judged according to the preponderance of his works—if
most of these are righteous, he is meritorious; if they are sin-
ful, he is wicked.
Rabbi Joseph ben Judah ibn Aknin said, “All men are destined for a reward in
the world to come and for the enjoyment of a feast of the fruits of their good works.” According to Rabbi Leo Trepp, the character of Olam Haba is “beyond human comprehension” and it is “error to regard it as an earthly paradise, transposed into heaven.” Further, he says:
Judaism does believe in resurrection. It even speaks of a
form of purgatory; this lasts but one year, and relief is given
the sufferers on the Sabbath. Judaism does not emphasize
this concept, however, for we are to follow the Mitzvot
[commandments of God] not for the sake of reward or in
fear of punishment, but for love of God. . . . The belief [in
the resurrection] has been widely abandoned in non-Orthodox
Judaism.
In regard to the “purgatory” mentioned above, Rabbi Trepp elaborates that during
the period of mourning following the death of a Jew that parents and children of the
deceased recite the “Kaddish” prayer “for eleven months.” “Tradition holds that after
this period, all except outspoken evildoers are irrevocably admitted to their reward.”
Kerry, this is why I say that it depends on what Jew you ask as to what Jews believe.
Finally, as I previously said, even if a person searches, 95% of the time there is no record of that person’s religious belief. I thought you would say that if there is such a record that Mormons shouldn’t baptize that person, but you said the opposite: if there is no record, they shouldn’t baptize them. What it seems you really mean is that if there is a record and if there is no record we shouldn’t baptize them. That puts us back to what I said before. Should we do what we believe Jesus Christ has commanded us to do or should we do what you want us to do?
Tom
Tom, I like your response, but I feel strongly that if a person’s religious beliefs are unknown and descendants cannot be found it is inappropriate to proxy baptize them in spite of the fact Jesus, according to Mormon belief commands you to do otherwise. I think we’ve reached a point in time in history where we can judge for ourselves and not rely on documents written thousands of years ago or a century ago based on what our values are today with respect to freedom of individual choice and respect for privacy Not to do so will only create divisiveness that runs counter to our civil society that has become increasingly intolerant to any sort of differences. As long as a minority of social-conservatives in this society are trying to dictate what we should believe or that the United States is a Christian nation, a notion that is bogus and tramples on 240 plus years of a secular republic, we should be doing more to respect the views of other religions and not focus exclusively on the teachings of our own religion. You made a choice to become a Mormon and I respect that without any criticism of that choice. However, I cannot accept the notion that giving a choice to the deceased to save their souls is up to humans on Earth to decide. Assuming there is a higher power, and I’ll neither confirm or deny it, each individual must seek his/her own destiny and to be fair, we ought to let the souls of our ancestors be to rest in peace as they and their descendants saw fit. They made their choices. Rather than inflaming and being offensive to others who do not accept the Mormon faith, I feel it is more sensible to conduct the due diligence I suggested earlier, and if no information can be found, simply cross the name off the list. That would be a genuine demonstration of respect for other faiths. As one whose family is made up of Jews, Catholic, Anglican, Buddhist and I have distant relatives in Malaysia who are Muslim, as well as those who are not religious at all, I find it is important to be a bridge and that means to accept that belief systems are very personal and private. I normally will not freely discuss religion with strangers because it can be such a sensitive issue. However, this is one area where I have to draw a line in the sand because it is something offensive (maybe not to you) but it is to me and to many others.
O.K., I think our discussion has gone about as far as we can take it. I will let you have the last word except for this–I think that if you cannot confirm or deny that there is a higher power you should not get so worked up over what those of us who do believe in God believe or practice.
Tom
I respectfully disagree with your last word. I get worked up on this matter because I am the descendant of Holocaust victims who ended up in Auschwitz because they were German Jews. It is not a matter of whether you believe in God or not; rather it is an issue of moral and ethical integrity. You forget that moral and ethical issues exist in many countries outside of religion. Take Confucianism, humanism and even Buddhism. Morality is something you are taught at home and it can (but does not have to be) reinforced at Church, Temple, Mosque. One may live a completely moral and ethical life indistinguishable from the religious person. In fact, there are probably more moral and ethical people today who do not identify themselves as adherents to any organized religion. I think it is disingenuous (and a bit obnoxious) to play the holier than thou position simply because I refuse say what I believe about a higher power. Again, that is a matter of personal privacy. You ought not to jump to conclusions like that. It is not how you make friends and influence people.
Shalom.
Kerry,
I just saw this from our Church about baptizing Holocaust victims a couple of minutes ago, so I thought you should see it.
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/first-presidency-issues-direction-members-names-ordinances
Tom
Tom, That is definitely a good start towards resolving this matter amicably, assuming practitioners follow the guidelines or rules. However, it should not be applied only to Holocaust victims, but to all other people who are not part of the Mormon faith.
Kerry, as you probably know by now, there is a web site dedicated to making all dead Mormons gay. But, you know, gay, Satanic, whatever, if they were to do what we do, it would have no effect on me. Even if they were to do something like that to, say, my dear departed Christian grandmother, it would have no effect on either of us, IMHO.
And if some other Christian church were to vicariously baptize her, if their motives were pure, like ours are, I would say, hey, thanks for thinking of her.
Be that as it may, I am thinking that this whole thing is a conspiracy of some kind. And I see Helen Radkey somewhere in the middle of it. This woman cares not one whit about anyone or anything but her vendetta against the LDS church. From what I understand, it is very difficult to submit some names to the temple, unless you are a direct descendant. Now, all of a sudden, all these names are coming up as being vicariously baptized. Especially Daniel Pearl, as he was relatively young and has not been gone for very long. His name would have to have been submitted by his wife, child, or parent, otherwise, permission would have to come from one or more of those, from what I understand about the name-submitting proceedures. Either his name was submittee by a close relative, or it was done for nefarious purposes, like this. I have a feeling that some people are going to get excomunicated or something.
Linda and Kerry,
Michael Otterson said the following yesteray: “With Anne Frank,” Mr. Otterson said, “this person tried to enter the name, found it was rejected, then created a duplicate record and falsified information to submit the record. And our system didn’t catch it.” He said the perpetrator’s account had been suspended.
Many of us “Mormons” believe that those who want to incite hatred agains the “Mormon” Church have submitted outrageous names for baptism to make us look bad and have used deceit to get around the procedures to catch such submissions. As far as Helen Radkey, an excommunicated, former Mormon is concerned, Mark Paredes, a former Jew who converted to being a Mormon recently reported that Helen Radkey tried to extort money from the Mormon Church in return for her not looking for embarassing names that have been submitted to the database. When they refused, she went looking elsewhere and the speculation is that she found someone to pay her for her activities in those persons running against Mitt Romney; otherwise, the timing of her disclosures are very suspicious because she has been doing her research for ten years.
Tom
Yes, I saw that article. I’ve always been convinced that there is a conspiracy going on. Especially since Radkey told the Trib a few years ago that she was done with looking for names, and was going to write a book or something. She said she has friends within the church, but if they are the ones who helped her, they might not be in the church much longer, IMHO.
What does Gandhi have to do with Hindu samaj? Let mormons or whoever convert his posthumously to whatever they wan to.
Amit, clearly you don’t understand the sensitivity regarding non-Christians being posthumously being proxy baptized. Maybe if you ought to consider that people of other faiths take this kind of practice as being demeaning towards their deceased relatives. Mormons may be thinking they are doing a favor, but that is only because they do not genuinely respect the beliefs of other religions and fear souls are all going to Hell. That’s fine for them to believe that, but it doesn’t mean that others necessarily accept their vision of the afterlife. Some may consider such practices as improper and disrespectful. Some religions do not accept the notion of an afterlife. One size does not fit all. Our job is to respect diversity of belief that exists in this world, without burning bridges and creating friction. What we decide to do with is own lives is a personal decision and it ought to be without imposition from outside forces. People talk the talk about respecting others, but many certainly do not walk the talk in practice…
We do not believe that the unbaptized are going to hell. They just will not go to as high a level of heaven as the baptized.
LindaSDF, frankly do you honestly believe that non-believers of Mormonism really care what you folks believe will happen to dead souls that are not baptized??? Some of us feel it is all fairy tale talk. I’m not going to disrespect you if you want to believe it. However, the point is that you are still trying to convince, no, rather, impose your set beliefs on others irrespective of whether or not we want to hear about it. I’ve reiterated a number of times that your proxy baptisms of deceased non-Mormons are an affront to many people, and that you are still unrepentant about it demonstrates your LACK of respect for other religions and belief systems. You are infringing on others rights to peacefully practice their own religion or lack of religion without interference. I think as an earlier poster has indicated, the practice of proxy baptizing Holocaust victims (and it should include their descendants is not allowed anymore. Time to take your holier than thou attitude and do some serious self reflection how you may be insulting and hurting others by defending an inappropriate ritual on non-Mormons.
You are disrespecting me and my faith, while DEMANDING that I respect yours.
I fail to see how our vicarious baptisms are interfering with anyone else’s right to peacefully practice their own religion. WE aren’t interfering in anything. WE aren’t doing this, I’m sure. I am almost positive it is being done by some renegade Mormons who are lackeys of Helen Radkey, who is ONLY concerned with her vendetta against the LDS church. Case in point: according to church sources, the latest “baptism” of Anne Frank was done DESPITE the fact that her records were flagged as “holocaust victim”, and not allowed to be submitted. In order to submit her name, the record had to be duplicated and some information falsified. Then submitted to the temple in the Dominican republic where the name was less likely to be immediately recognized.
Also, the only people who could permissably submit Daniel Pearl’s name without the permission of the family would be immediate family (parents, spouse, siblings or children).
Then add that, without Helen Radkey (who I’m told is not supposed to have access to these records in the first place) and her “whistle blowing”, most non members would never have known about this, it all adds up to “conspiracy”. (and no, we’re not trying to keep it secret, but neither are we advertising it hither and yon, as it’s something sacred to us)
Church policy is, that only names of family are to be submitted to the temple. I have no problem with this. I’m thinking that, even as we read this, there are some quiet excommunications being carried out. Or there should be, IMHO.
LindaSDF, I’m not trying to disrespect your in the least. You don’t even know what I believe. You are arguing emotionally, while I’m trying to keep this rational. I have read every single posting you’ve made thus far, and each one appears to be a justification for what Mormons do and believe. That I, as a non-Mormon, are NOT interested in what you believe, as much of what you say is opposing my belief system, I feel you are pushing and imposing your religion on others, not simply trying explaining it. That’s being disrespectful. Furthermore, it infringes on my rights and that is where I draw a line in the sand. Respect means that you too must come to a realization that your belief systems/your way is not what everyone wants in their lives. It means that you respect and accept that there will be differences of opinion and belief. If someone says “No” and you still carry on, you are behaving in essence like the moral equivalent of a rapist who ignores his/her victim. Time to let it go.
Doesn’t matter what you say, however. We will continue doing vicarious baptisms. Hopefully, those who did these “illegal” baptisms are being dealt with and there will be no more stink.
I am not pushing my religion on anyone. You can’t tell anyone to stop believing what they believe, or practicing their religion. It’s like saying to a Jewish person “Your yarmulke offends me, stop wearing it” or to a Catholic “Stop crossing yourself, it offends me” or to a Sikh person “Take off that turban and shave your beard, it offends me”.
And people wonder why we try to keep sacred and don’t discuss what goes on in the temple! We get “Matthew 7:6’d”!
Your act of totally ignoring the feeling of non-Mormons is outrageously offensive. You keep on preaching your beliefs whilst refusing to listen to what others say and feel about it. You demonstrate a complete lack of tolerance towards others. YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM in our society NOT its solution. I hope the editors of this esteemed site will either politely ask you to cease and desist, or simply block your responses. Your last statement is again an attempt to impose your religion. You can’t even express yourself without making quotes from the Bible. Is that even legitimate debate???
LInda and Kerry,
You have both made your points. It is now descending into name-calling instead of inquiry and explanation.
Time to cease and desist.
Why do you ask for something you are not prepared to give?
In the USA, we have a constitutional right to practice our faith as we see it. If we want to vicariously baptize every ancestor of ours, that’s ever been even remotely related to us, back to Adam, that’s our right and pleasure. You can be offended, you can tell us to stop, but in the end, we will do what we feel God wants us to do.
We are not imposing anything on you. You have your freedom of choice. They have their freedom of choice.
Was it right to baptize those specific people? That’s not up to me. That’s between God, the person who was baptized, and the person who submitted the name “illegally”, If that person gets disciplined by the church authorities, that’s between them.
As for blocking me, my opinion is just as valid as your’s.
I have just found out that my departed mother has been listed on this lsd list. Does anybody have a site where I can have the cunt who put her there baptised into a satanic church and where I would have a certificate of baptism to send to her and on facebook. I dont like my family been fucked with.
@gerry I’m not sure what list you are talking about. However, under current church guidelines, unless the person submitting a name for vicarious baptism is a direct descendant, they would have to get your permission.