Pissing on "Frenchy"'s Grave?; Or, a Case Study in Mopologetic Selfishness

[Gadianton]

Yeah...as a rhetorical argument, that works, but be careful because it will backfire into a defense of Da{}, as it castigates religious belief in general, making all believers as guilty as he is.

The truth is that this person who is a temple worker who offered to help Frenchy believes all the same things, but is likely a humble person.

[Doctor Scratch]

I see that the spin-doctoring is in full swing:

Anyway, according to [DMB] you are my "lackey" and you did something to Frenchy's Family Search record in order to curry favor with me. (Which, if it's true, was an abject failure, because I had never heard of what you supposedly did until [they] umm, broke the news.)

DP: "... you did something to Frenchy's Family Search record ... " I done looked him up. It's my hobby.

Actually, no. Tangata *created* a record (apparently in violation of Church policy) and then scrambled to *delete* it after discovering that a record was already there! So he was in such a state of Mopologetic zeal that he didn’t even bother to “done look him up.” And recall that in response to Tangata’s boasting about his actions, DCP replied, “Wonderful!”

By the way: isn’t Tangata the new avatar for the guy who was a Utah health official?

[Moksha]

Okay.... So if this is true, then why didn't he--DCP--hit "Pause" on the endless vacations and horsing around in order to provide this "cure" to Frenchy?

What about the understanding that both Church administration and apologetics substitute for the burdens of redeeming the dead and performing their temple ordinances? Dr. Peterson posts on both SeN and the Interpreter of the Saints, and serves as an ambassador-at-large for the entire Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Let Dr. Peterson's disciples follow through on the nitty gritty stuff, especially if it is an enjoyable hobby. Someone needs to mop up and turn the lights off.

[Marcus]

Heres DCP's reason for not doing Frenchy's temple work:

...Having never known nor even met any other member of Frenchy Morrell’s family, and having met Frenchy himself only once, briefly and years ago, and being neither his undivorced spouse nor his adult child nor his father or mother or brother or sister, I had no right under the rules of the Church to submit his or his late wife’s name for temple work. Moreover, I’m not only not among his closest living relatives, I don’t even know any of his closest living relatives. My contacting them out of the blue as a stranger seeking permission to perform an unfamiliar religious ritual on behalf, essentially, of two total strangers wouldn’t have made much sense to them even if I were somehow able to find those closest currently living relatives.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... uests.html

But, he thought it was "wonderful!" that tangata stepped in and did the work? Even though he didn't know Frenchy either? And even though it caused one record to have to be deleted? This is getting confusing.

[Moksha]

But, he thought it was "wonderful!" that tangata stepped in and did the work? Even though he didn't know Frenchy either? And even though it caused one record to have to be deleted? This is getting confusing.

Dr. Peterson is being apologetic. Faithful Mormons gather the names of people they don't know and perform the ordinances for them all the time. Do you remember when Dr. Peterson defended the baptism of Holocaust victims? He argued that they will appreciate this work in Spirit Paradise rather than being stuck in Spirit Prison.

Mickey and Minnie Mouse had their work done many times, and it was done by ordinary members rather than Disney characters.

[I Have Questions]

Heres DCP's reason for not doing Frenchy's temple work:

...Having never known nor even met any other member of Frenchy Morrell’s family, and having met Frenchy himself only once, briefly and years ago, and being neither his undivorced spouse nor his adult child nor his father or mother or brother or sister, I had no right under the rules of the Church to submit his or his late wife’s name for temple work. Moreover, I’m not only not among his closest living relatives, I don’t even know any of his closest living relatives. My contacting them out of the blue as a stranger seeking permission to perform an unfamiliar religious ritual on behalf, essentially, of two total strangers wouldn’t have made much sense to them even if I were somehow able to find those closest currently living relatives.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... uests.html

But, he thought it was "wonderful!" that tangata stepped in and did the work? Even though he didn't know Frenchy either? And even though it caused one record to have to be deleted? This is getting confusing.

Precisely. If DCP thought he had no right under the rules of the Church to submit Frenchy's or his late "wives" names for temple work, then "tangata" was in the same position. DCP should not be declaring a breach of Church rules as "wonderful". This revelation about what "tangata" did also rebuts the idea that the Church now has protocols in place preventing spurious entries being made.

The other thing DCP's protestations do is highlight just how much blog fodder he's created out of a very "brief" single encounter with an individual he really didn't get to know. Yet he's publicly extolling his own soul searching about poor old Frenchy. Did DCP even ask Frenchy if he had kids? Living family? Did he, in fact, talk to Frenchy at all, or did he just peer at the gravestone and make some assumptions? For instance, DCP seemed unaware that Frenchy had been married twice. I'll wager he didn't start a conversation about the Plan of Happiness like members are supposed to when the opportunity presents itself. Perhaps Frenchy wasn't even there and he picked the name up off the gravestone "beloved wife of Frenchy".

[Gadianton]

Precisely. If DCP thought he had no right under the rules of the Church to submit Frenchy's or his late "wives" names for temple work, then "tangata" was in the same position.

People who aren't involved in the 3-fold mission of the Church on a day-to-day basis obviously don't know the nuance of Church procedure in these matters. It's very possible tangata, a faithful Saint with a shoulder to the wheel, knows how to redeem the dead due to extensive personal experience. Not knowing the details of Church procedure related to its three-fold mission, or being mistaken about it, is just another way of saying that you don't care about it. "Officer, I didn't know that street going by the school just down the block from me was 15 mph. I swear, I really didn't!"

I'm sure Da{} knows a whole lot more about the best places to eat in Egypt than tangata does. I would about to say "hotel prices" but even that is "woman's work" as we've learned in the last few months. I'd forgotten about Marcus's tid-bit.

[Marcus]

Well this is convenient. One of Frenchy's wives is Wanda...

...Wanda happens to be a relative of mine (a ninth cousin). Therefore, Frenchy is a distant in-law cousin. So all my work on their records was very appropriate...

Hm. So, Frenchy's 'nearest living relative' was a ninth cousin by marriage to his wife?

And then, this:

For both Frenchy and Wanda their marriage to each other was a second marriage.

Oops. So, no sealing for you??? However, I recall reading somewhere that while living, women can only be sealed to one man (unlike the multi-wife sealings available to living men), after their death women can be sealed to all of their husbands. They all must be dead also. I think. The rules are getting increasingly convoluted.

Apparently there are going to be a lot of large group marriages going on up there in the LDS Kingdom. The comments on SeN never cease to entertain.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Well this is convenient. One of Frenchy's wives is Wanda...

...Wanda happens to be a relative of mine (a ninth cousin). Therefore, Frenchy is a distant in-law cousin. So all my work on their records was very appropriate...

Hm. So, Frenchy's 'nearest living relative' was a ninth cousin by marriage to his wife?

And then, this:

For both Frenchy and Wanda their marriage to each other was a second marriage.

Oops. So, no sealing for you??? However, I recall reading somewhere that while living, women can only be sealed to one man (unlike the multi-wife sealings available to living men), after their death women can be sealed to all of their husbands. They all must be dead also. I think. The rules are getting increasingly convoluted.

Apparently there are going to be a lot of large group marriages going on up there in the LDS Kingdom. The comments on SeN never cease to entertain.

Wow! Those comments certainly are entertaining. So, tanata is the ninth cousin of Wanda and shares a great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparent with Wanda. Good grief! You really can't make this stuff up.

I'm more more closely related to former President Obama than tanata is to Wanda. I guess I'm qualified to do Obama's temple work once he passes.

[Doctor Scratch]

Some interesting developments on "SeN" recently. I see that Tangata is now directly contradicting Dr. Peterson's assertions that it was "against the rules" for him to help out with Frency's eternal salvation. Recall that DCP said:

Having never known nor even met any other member of Frenchy Morrell’s family, and having met Frenchy himself only once, briefly and years ago, and being neither his undivorced spouse nor his adult child nor his father or mother or brother or sister, I had no right under the rules of the Church to submit his or his late wife’s name for temple work.

Now, here is Tangata, who claims special expertise in this arena (he even reports that he "teach[es] others the rules"):

Making corrections and standardizations to FamilySearch records (even non-relative records) is appropriate and something that I was instructed to do as a missionary (I am now in my third mission doing this kind of work). We have a team of missionaries in our mission spending all day doing just these kinds of activity. One of the side activities that all members can do is correct and standardize records. It doesn't have to be records for their relatives.

(emphasis added)

Here is the thing: the main charge (it is right there in the title of the OP, for heaven's sake) is that DCP was acting selfishly. He repeatedly used Frenchy's story to generate clicks (and, by extension, money--even if it was only a few cents) and did absolutely nothing to help out with Frenchy's eternal salvation. He apparently did not even bother to look him up in FamilySearch. After having this pointed out to him, DCP went to all the trouble of actually looking up the Church's policies on this sort of thing in the hopes of exonerating himself. (Which, unfortunately, demonstrates that he wasn't actually sure about what the policies even *were*.) And now we have Tangata, the "expert" on this sort of thing, stating openly that, yes, in fact Dr. Peterson *could* have lifted a finger and logged into FamilySearch in order to help out. But, he didn't. His relationship to Frenchy was a purely exploitative and extractive one. Selfish, in other words.