I find the Jewish indignation about Baptism for the Dead

[Indy Coug]

The Jews shouldn't take offense because

1. It doesn't involve any religious coercion. No living non-believer is forced to participate in the ordinances nor in the process of obtaining genealogical records for this purpose. Those on the other side are perfectly free to accept or reject the work done on their behalf.
2. The performances are done in secret, not in a public venue.
3. The identities of the people who have had work done for them, while technically available to the public, isn't publicized by the church.

IMO, the church was and is already "sensitive" about this issue, regardless of any of this wrangling over Holocaust records and so forth.

The bottom line is that this only became an issue because someone with a burr up their butts sought to make this an issue.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

What you call being political correct, other people simply call being respectful. Is it really that big of an inconvenience to try to not offend other people?

I think Indy has pointed out that the Church has tried to be respectful. What some of the outspoken are stating is we should defer to their religious views and not our own. When will the Jews defer to our religious views and not theirs? Should the Jews stop leaving a cup for Elijah because that offends in that he has already come?

In this matter, those complaining appear to be overly sensitive. The Church members have done the work discreetly and it is the offended who have made it public.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by tooblue

Your criticisms are hollow and disrespectful of the Lord's annointed. Each and every member of the church is responsible for the successful understanding and application of revelation ... the failure to act on all revelation rests with the body of the church.

Okay, the phone comment was out of line. My apologies. However, I don't think they get a free pass on not honoring their agreements because they happen to be General Authorities. If they are not willing or able to honor the agreement, they need to just say so. To me, whether or not the Jews have the right to stop the baptisms is a separate issue. The fact is they agreed not to do it. The burden of honoring the agreement is on the church.

[Indy Coug]

I'm just curious how you think the church has any feasible means to provide any real oversight over this agreement. Temple work submissions are done by individuals, not by the church.

All the church can and should be reasonably be expected to do is to make known the church policy regarding work for the Jewish deceased and hope that its membership complies with their request.

[MikeWaters]

It would be interesting if someone were disfellowshipped or excommunicated for knowingly doing the work on a Jew.

That would be a very strange place to arrive to.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I'm just curious how you think the church has any feasible means to provide any real oversight over this agreement. Temple work submissions are done by individuals, not by the church.

All the church can and should be reasonably be expected to do is to make known the church policy regarding work for the Jewish deceased and hope that its membership complies with their request.

The reason I think they have the means for oversight is they agreed to do it. So either the plan they devised before making the agreement isn't working or they never planned on honoring it. Most likely, they made a plan that doesn't work. If there is no possible way to make it work, I think they should go back and say that they have tried, but it can't be done. I would like to think that in the age of computers, they could come up with something workable.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

It would be interesting if someone were disfellowshipped or excommunicated for knowingly doing the work on a Jew.

That would be a very strange place to arrive to.

Disfellowshipped for doing temple work... That would be interesting!

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I think the reasons the Jews don't want their relatives baptized are irrelevant. The Church should just keep their word and not baptize them. They shouldn't have made a promise they didn't intend to keep. Why God's "inspired" leaders couldn't come up with an effective plan to honor their agreement is beyond me.

If it's really that simple, what is your proposal for improved enforcement? If we're going to start bashing the church leadership for being uninspired and/or deceitful, then please provide the text of the agreement and let's go over point by point what was agreed to and what mechanisms the church claimed would be used to implement such an agreement.

Thanks in advance.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

Okay, the phone comment was out of line. My apologies. However, I don't think they get a free pass on not honoring their agreements because they happen to be General Authorities. If they are not willing or able to honor the agreement, they need to just say so. To me, whether or not the Jews have the right to stop the baptisms is a separate issue. The fact is they agreed not to do it. The burden of honoring the agreement is on the church.

Actually the burden is on faithful temple recommend holders to do the work instead of bitching about it.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

If it's really that simple, what is your proposal for improved enforcement? If we're going to start bashing the church leadership for being uninspired and/or deceitful, then please provide the text of the agreement and let's go over point by point what was agreed to and what mechanisms the church claimed would be used to implement such an agreement.

Thanks in advance.

I don't have a proposal for improved enforcement. It wasn't my promise. The only knowledge of the agreement I have is what has been reported on the news. The key point (which the church hasn't disputed) is that the baptisms would no longer take place. I'm not privy to their point by point plan of enforcing it. It's not necessary to know what the plan is to know that it isn't working. Like I said before, if it can't be enforced at this time, come clean and say it can't be done.