Posted on 02/15/2012 6:11:13 AM PST by Colofornian
Nobel-laureate Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel and a top official from the Simon Wiesenthal Center said Tuesday that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney should use his stature in the Mormon church to block its members from posthumously baptizing Jewish Holocaust victims.
Their comments followed reports that Mormons had baptized the deceased parents of Wiesenthal, the late Holocaust survivor and Nazi hunter.
A spokeswoman for Romney said his campaign would not comment, directing all inquiries to church officials.
Posthumous baptisms of non-Mormons are a regular practice of the Mormon religion. Church members believe the ritual creates the possibility for the deceased to enter their conception of Heaven.
Individual members can submit names, usually of deceased relatives, for proxy baptisms. The church has tried to improve its technology to block the process from including Jewish Holocaust victims. In this case, officials blamed an unidentified individual.
“We sincerely regret that the actions of an individual member of the church led to the inappropriate submission of these names,” spokesman Michael Purdy said in a statement...
The practice of baptizing Holocaust victims has long been offensive to Jews. After years of negotiations, Mormon officials have prohibited posthumous baptisms of Jewish Holocaust victims.
There is no indication that Romney has ever been involved in the proxy baptism of a Holocaust victim. Asked if he had ever participated in posthumous baptisms, Romney told Newsweek in 2007 that, “I have in my life, but I haven’t recently.”
The controversy could put Romney in the uncomfortable position of having to directly address Mormon theology, a topic he has so far avoided in his current campaign. Many evangelical voters have expressed skepticism about Mormonism, and Romney, a former lay leader in the church, has rarely discussed his experiences in the church.
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at bangordailynews.com ...
(Yeah, that's who we want in the White House...somebody into baptizing dead people... /sarc)
“Asked if he had ever participated in posthumous baptisms, Romney told Newsweek in 2007 that, ‘I have in my life, but I haven’t recently.’”
What is ‘recently’? Yesterday. Day before? An hour ago? The fact that he did it at all is despicable.
Good luck to Elie Wiesel! I don't imagine he will get very far with this.
That raises a sticky question for all Christians, particularly Catholics. Can you be saved by the act of a third party (other than Christ)?
Words mean things, and among those words are “whosoever believeth in me shall not perish, but have everlasting life”*. An individual being baptized as an infant, or another being baptized after death has not believed, so is not promised life. The Catholic liturgy includes professing belief in “one baptism for the forgiveness of sins”, yet Christ was baptized even though he was sinless.
Since Adolf Hitler was baptized, does that mean we’ll be seeing him in Heaven? Provided, that is, that we have accepted Christ’s sacrifice and are saved, or have been baptized as well?
In short, baptizing someone who is already dead, while a loving gesture, is of no effect.
*From memory, and the words may vary by version.
Why? I'm Baptist, and it doesn't offend me. Nothing they do will affect my relationship with God. If the Wiccans want to confirm me as a High Priest, or whatever, of their coven, so what? I won't be doing thier rituals or worshiping the Mother, Maid, or Crone.
So what is the big deal?
Your reaction is the same as mine. If their ritual means nothing to the subject, how does it affect him?
If the complainers don’t believe in baptism for the dead,why would they care that the Mormons are doing it? If the Mormons baptized my ancestors, I would jut wonder why they are doing the ineffective.
Anyway, there is freedom to practice one’s religion in the Constitution. They may be irrational, but they are not harming anyone.
Finally a sensible response.
(Not Catholic)...but The Catholic liturgy derives this DIRECT from the New Testament (Acts 2): 38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
...among those words are “whosoever believeth in me shall not perish, but have everlasting life”*. An individual being baptized as an infant, or another being baptized after death has not believed, so is not promised life.
Well you cited Mark 16:16 -- but only half of it: 16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Note that Mark 16:16 DOES NOT say: "Whoever does not believe AND IS NOT BAPTIZED will be condemned."
So, obviously lack of baptism itself doesn't necessarily condemn. Still...you said, an individual baptized as an infant doesn't believe [I assume you meant doesn't necessarily believe]
Have you ever thought about when Jewish babies were considered part of the covenant people of God? Answer? At 8 days when they were circumcized.
Per "the Bible, baptism (somewhat like Old Testament circumcision, administered to 8-day-old-babies--see Col. 2:11-12) is God's gracious way of washing away our sins--even the sins of infants--without any help or cooperation on our part. It is a wonderful gift of a loving and gracious God.” (Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2330620/posts?q=1&;page=51 [post #38])
Colossians 2:11-12: In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.
No corpse can bury itself. That is a 100% passive posture. Likewise, baptism in the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit isn't an act of man, it's an act of God exercised thru man.
Otherwise, we wouldn't have the passages we do on baptism (Acts 2:38-39; Col. 2:11-12; romans 6:1-4; the passage by Peter...)
Well reasoned.
By that logic, we should not complain when Westboro Baptist Church protests soldiers’ funerals, because they are not harming either the dead or the mourners. They’re just offending the living, who don’t matter, right?
Love your response. What mumjo jumbo is done by mumjojumboists doesn’t make a hill o’ beans worth of difference to anyone who realizes it is all meaningless mumbo jumbo.
Now you didn’t happen to read/watch “Game of Thrones” now did you?
Mother Maid and Crone?
How about Father, Warrior and Builder?
And the Stranger?
;)
Can you be saved by the act of a third party (other than Christ)?
No. This seems to be a fight between Wiesel, who’s offended by something that just doesn’t matter and doesn’t affect his parents in the least, and the Mormons, whose presumptuous third-party baptisms are spiritual arrogance.
So what if there's freedom in the constitution to practice religion; 'tis also freedom in the constitution to critique it...now why did I have to say something so simple? ('Cause you resorted to something so simple)
As for the "harming anyone" question -- something brought up by BigEdLB ... keep reading below:
There are plenty of things that one can criticize Romney for, but, to jump on a religious procedure which causes no physical harm to anyone is a diversion in this year with all the other things that are going on. [BigEdLB]
Millions of Mormon man-hours -- Genealogy -- is rooted in baptizing dead people. Now, genealogy for "roots-searching" is fine, but when "genealogy as ultra time consuming religious obsession" takes over, wouldn't you say it might be good to consider what the apostle Paul has to say about this?
Or do you all just ignore the New Testament?
...stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer nor to devote themselves to myths AND ENDLESS GENEALOGIES. THESE PROMOTE CONTROVERSIES RATHER THAN GOD'S WORK—which is by faith." (1 Timothy 1:3-4)
But AVOID FOOLISH CONTROVERSIES AND GENEALOGIES...because these are unprofitable and useless. (Titus 3:9)
(Paul says it's useless, provokes controversy, and is not faith-promoting. So even the controversy ignited by protagonist Mormons is distracting)
As for the question, "Does this 'hurt' anyone?" yes it does -- in two prominent ways covered below.
ONE It hurts the living because over-focusing on the dead distracts what we can do in relating to & in caring for the living!.
We can all agree that Jesus talked much about serving the living -- the poor, the widow, the orphan, the lost sheep, right?
So what would happen in the world if all religions obsessed with the dead as much as Mormons do? Obviously, we're not going to "end poverty in our lifetime" (Jesus said, "the poor will always be with you")...but since countless LDS leaders have called the Mormon people self-saviors and saviors of the dead, it's not only a distraction from the poor but delusional.
And that leads to...
We already have a "Savior of the world" -- we don't need millions more trying to bump Jesus out of that limelight:
* And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be THE Savior of the world. (1 John 4:14)
* They said to the woman, "We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is THE Savior of the world." (John 4:42)
Last time I looked in the Bible, Christians were supposed to object to idolatry in their culture. And if you don't think that Mormons make baptizers of the dead "saviors" who rival Jesus Christ, you haven't read their leaders' comments on baptism of the dead. For those citations, see: Are Mormon people LITERAL saviors of dead Jews, others? (The OTHER World Series: Vanity)
If you're a Christian or Jew and you conclude "this doesn't harm anyone," you're catering to idolatry -- substitute "saviors" pretending to act in his name.
11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
So someone who objects to the pagan rituals being performed in a family members name, who is claiming their privilege to worship how, where or what they may is being "denied" this privilege by the LdS church.
Unless of course, SLC has retracted the "allow" part of that creed.
No respect.
This seems, at first blush, like a lot of pearl-clutching over nothing.
On reflection it seems that Wiesel, activist that he is, is grasping at straws in an effort to insert himself into the Republican presidential nominee selection process. And he clearly is not a Republican.
I am not only not in favor of Romney, I actively oppose him.
But I really resent this poo-slinging by Wiesel. FU Elie!
Well, it seems like many of you aren't looking @ this from either a Jewish or even New Testament angle.
From a Jewish holocaust perspective, they see Jewish identity as the core target of why so many Jews became readily "expendable." So...as it was in life, they see Jewish identity targeted even in death...where they see Mormons saying to them, "No. We can't let you be with a Jewish identity; we will hang a Mormon tag on them instead."
From a New Testament angle, I covered this in post #15...The apostle Paul says in 1 Tim. 1:3-4 & Titus 3:9 that genealogy promoting to the degree it was practiced was useless, provoked controversy, and wasn't faith-promoting.
I would act that since Mormons see themselves as "saviors" via this process, it's also idolatry -- substituting themselves as "saviors" in diluding what Jesus did on the cross.
I did watch “Game of Thrones”. I’ve also read a LOT about paganism, neo-paganism, voodoo, and Hinduism. Because it’s interesting. Wrong, but interesting.
I had just read the posting you have posted and if my memory is correct, my church, the Roman Catholic Church put out a rule from the Vatican a couple of years ago to parishes that when it comes to baptism certificates, not to give them out in bulk numbers because they were asked for by Mormons who would used them to baptized their dead Catholic ancestors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.