Genealogy and the LDS Church

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_mormonmistress
_Emeritus
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:58 am

Genealogy and the LDS Church

Post by _mormonmistress »

I think the greatest contribution the LDS church have made to society is in their collection of genealogy records. I am a keen genealogist and have been researching my family tree for years. If it weren't for being able to order in a film from a little known parish in Scotland, I wouldn't have been aware of about 5 or 6 generations of the branch of my family where my surname came from.

How did the whole genealogy thing come about? What prompted the church to film all the old parish records?
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: Genealogy and the LDS Church

Post by _asbestosman »

mormonmistress wrote:How did the whole genealogy thing come about? What prompted the church to film all the old parish records?

That thing about being a late starter in the whole true church department. Geneology is how the church finds the names of people for whom it then performs ordinances for such as baptism. Baptism for the dead is spoken of in 1 Cor. 15:29.

The idea is that people who didn't get a chance to accept the fulness of the gospel found in the LDS church are given a chance in the next life. However, these people need to have these ordinances performed for them by proxy.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Post by _Gazelam »

In order for one to enter heaven, the name of Christ must be sealed upon them. This sealing takes place in the waters of Baptism and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The Church has gone through long periods of apostacy, times where the authority to act in the name of God was not upon the earth. During these times, the ordinace of Baptism was either not practised, or was practised without authority and/ or in the wrong manner.

These ordinances are now done by proxy in the Temples of the Lord.

Section 138 of the Doctrine and Covenants deals with the doctrine of the gospel beign accepted or rejected by the dead, who had not had the opportunity to learn of Christ in this life.

http://scriptures.LDS.org/en/dc/138
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_mormonmistress
_Emeritus
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:58 am

Post by _mormonmistress »

what is an example of a baptism performed without authority or one done in the wrong manner? Who is supposed to authorise them?

So if you learnt about Christ and rejected him, you don't get a proxy baptism?

I think it's kinda weird to be performing baptisms for dead people. I wouldn't be too happy if any of my descendents did that for me. It's as bad as baptising a child. Religious ceremony of any kind should be willingly participated in. It's not something you should force upon the dead or the young.

Maybe I should put a clause in my will stating that if my descendents join such a religion in the future (one that doesn't exist yet!), that I do not give my permission for them to baptise me into it by proxy.
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

mormonmistress wrote:what is an example of a baptism performed without authority or one done in the wrong manner? Who is supposed to authorise them?

According to the LDS church, only the LDS church is authorized to perform baptisms. The proper manner is by immersion, not sprinkling.

So if you learnt about Christ and rejected him, you don't get a proxy baptism?

We do it anyway since we can't really be sure what a fair rejection is.

I think it's kinda weird to be performing baptisms for dead people. I wouldn't be too happy if any of my descendents did that for me. It's as bad as baptising a child. Religious ceremony of any kind should be willingly participated in. It's not something you should force upon the dead or the young.


The dead do not participate. Rather they are given the chance to accept or reject the work performed in their behalf. A proxy baptism carries no obligation for the dead, but is supposed to open doors for them if they so choose to walk through. Someone who is baptized by proxy is not a Mormon--certainly not without choosing to accept it in the next world.

Maybe I should put a clause in my will stating that if my descendents join such a religion in the future (one that doesn't exist yet!), that I do not give my permission for them to baptise me into it by proxy.

You certainly wouldn't be the only one. Quite a few Jews are upset with the church doing proxy work for Holocaust victims even though the proxy work does not make them Mormons. From our perspective, doing proxy work is much like praying for the dead (or living). It does not take away agency or change one's affiliation at all.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_mormonmistress
_Emeritus
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:58 am

Post by _mormonmistress »

asbestosman wrote:
mormonmistress wrote:what is an example of a baptism performed without authority or one done in the wrong manner? Who is supposed to authorise them?

According to the LDS church, only the LDS church is authorized to perform baptisms. The proper manner is by immersion, not sprinkling.

So if you learnt about Christ and rejected him, you don't get a proxy baptism?

We do it anyway since we can't really be sure what a fair rejection is.

I think it's kinda weird to be performing baptisms for dead people. I wouldn't be too happy if any of my descendents did that for me. It's as bad as baptising a child. Religious ceremony of any kind should be willingly participated in. It's not something you should force upon the dead or the young.


The dead do not participate. Rather they are given the chance to accept or reject the work performed in their behalf. A proxy baptism carries no obligation for the dead, but is supposed to open doors for them if they so choose to walk through. Someone who is baptized by proxy is not a Mormon--certainly not without choosing to accept it in the next world.

Maybe I should put a clause in my will stating that if my descendents join such a religion in the future (one that doesn't exist yet!), that I do not give my permission for them to baptise me into it by proxy.

You certainly wouldn't be the only one. Quite a few Jews are upset with the church doing proxy work for Holocaust victims even though the proxy work does not make them Mormons. From our perspective, doing proxy work is much like praying for the dead (or living). It does not take away agency or change one's affiliation at all.


Well, I'm happier about the fact that the dead still get a chance to reject the work performed on their behalf. I was thinking that they had no choice in the matter!

Re immersion for baptism. Is that out of the Book of Mormon too? My Catholic sprinkling doesn't pathe my way into heaven then? Goddammit!
Post Reply