Posted by:
Nightingale
(
)
Date: March 21, 2022 06:02PM
Interesting article, Richard. Thanks!
As an aside, I noted this statement in the article - "Church authorities blocked attempts to baptize mass murderers Charles Manson and Stephen Paddock."
I'm surprised because don't Christians teach that redemption is open to anyone, even mass murderers? Indeed, this teaching is a cause for contention as it contradicts the sense of justice most of us instinctively feel. Such as how do the worst of humans get to go to heaven. But that would seem to be the Christian interpretation of the teaching that forgiveness is available to anyone who repents. And which of us can know who repents, or doesn't? So if Manson et al repent upon their deathbed/execution they'll be dancing and singing in heaven that very day, right alongside lifelong Christian believers. It would seem.
Not that that is a thrilling proposition.
Because. Justice.
As for baptism for the dead, here is one Christian-source commentary on that practice (1 Corinthians 15-29):
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_corinthians/15-29.htmEllicott’s Commentary re baptism for the dead:
“There have been numerous and ingenious conjectures as to the meaning of this passage. The only tenable interpretation is that there existed amongst some of the Christians at Corinth a practice of baptising a living person in the stead of some convert who had died before that sacrament had been administered to him. Such a practice existed amongst the Marcionites in the second century, and still earlier amongst a sect called the Corinthians."
"The idea evidently was that whatever benefit flowed from baptism might be thus vicariously secured for the deceased Christian. St. Chrysostom gives the following description of it:—“After a catechumen (i.e., one prepared for baptism, but not actually baptised) was dead, they hid a living man under the bed of the deceased; then coming to the bed of the dead man they spake to him, and asked whether he would receive baptism, and he making no answer, the other replied in his stead, and so they baptised the ‘living for the dead.’”
“Does St. Paul then, by what he here says, sanction the superstitious practice? Certainly not. He carefully separates himself and the Corinthians, to whom he immediately addresses himself, from those who adopted this custom. He no longer uses the first or second person; it is “they” throughout this passage. It is no proof to others; it is simply the argumentum ad hominem. Those who do that, and disbelieve a resurrection, refute themselves. This custom possibly sprang up amongst the Jewish converts, who had been accustomed to something similar in their own faith. If a Jew died without having been purified from some ceremonial uncleanness, some living person had the necessary ablution performed on them, and the dead were so accounted clean.”
-----
I note that Ellicott refers to baptism for the dead as a "superstition". I also note that he describes the dead person as being a "convert" - a person who had converted to Christianity but had died before they were able to be baptized.
That doesn't fit with the Mormon belief and practice of baptizing every dead person whose name they can get hold of.
However, the article cited by Richard states the following about Mormon beliefs:
“The dead person residing in spirit prison must consent to their baptism for it to be efficacious.”
This I did not know, as a mere convert. That makes the dead baptisms slightly less offensive, perhaps, especially if the person being dead-baptized and/or their family don't even know about it. (I do deeply regret giving them my grandparents' names and yet, in the grand scheme of the universe, does it matter two hoots?).
From the article as well:
“The practice [of baptisms for the dead] has not been without controversy as posthumous baptism is not limited to immediate family members. The practice of baptizing Holocaust victims drew wide ranging criticism in the 1990s and in 2012 the Church had to apologize when it was revealed that it had baptized Anne Frank.”
“Safeguards to prevent the posthumous baptism of Holocaust victims have been put in place.”
-----
So the Mormon Church recognizes (even if under pressure) that the practice is offensive to the memories and survivors of Jewish Holocaust victims. Yet, they continue to dead-dunk Jewish people who, by definition, would not likely join the offshoot-Christian faith of Mormonism (although there are Jewish Christians, I know, but that is by their own direct choice). Examples of Jewish people dead-dunked by Mormons are the parents of Steven Spielberg. His family is described as being Orthodox Jewish.
I don't think the Christian imperative to proselytize the world extends into the afterlife. Please God JW and Mormon missionaries won't be banging on people's doors in heaven still trying to persuade them to switch teams. Surely by then the roster is set.