Readers respond to the controversy:
Looking at this as a lifelong atheist, I can’t see anything in Mormon baptismal practice that’s any more troubling than having my Christian relatives constantly praying for my conversion (which they do constantly). Yes, it’s creepy, even annoying. Maybe even disrespectful. But in a country where I am routinely demonized by Bible-thumping preachers, it’s a pretty low-grade form of disrespect. I’m far more bothered by Mormon missionaries ringing at my door twice a year.
Another:
You wrote: “I’m with Kohen. In fact, I’d go further. It’s deeply disrespectful to and invasive of other faiths to be posthumously coopted in this fashion.” You’re wrong, Sully. Why is this different than Catholics praying for the dead? My dad was a deacon and I went to daily Mass growing up (not by choice) and I know they prayed for all dead and suffering souls regardless of religious affiliation. They prayed for “reconciliation” with their “separated” Protestant brethren, by which they meant that Protestants would wisen up and embrace the pope and all things Roman Catholic. They prayed for the conversion of nonbelievers or believers of other religions (whether we are perfectly content in our unbelief or not).
Along those lines, another asks, “How is the practice of saying a deceased person’s name during a religious ceremony any more “disrespectful” or “invasive” than baptizing infants who have no choice in the matter?” Another clears up such confusion regarding posthumous baptisms:
I am a practicing Mormon and regularly attend the temple. I can completely understand how this practice can be seen as disrespectful and insensitive to members of other faiths. My only frustration in the debate comes from the thought that Mormons believe that once the posthumous baptism is performed, that person is now a Mormon. That is not the case.
We believe that even after this baptism by proxy is performed that person has the ability to accept or decline the ordinance. They are not listed on any records of the church as members, nor do we claim them to be. The only record kept is if the baptism was performed or not, mostly in an effort to prevent duplication of baptisms.
Any situation dealing with loved ones is clearly sensitive, especially when religion and spirituality is concerned. I cannot, and do not speak on behalf of the church, but I believe that these baptisms are done out of genuine charity for others, not out of an attempt to make everyone a member of our church, or to offend those not of our faith. I admit that some of our beliefs can seem absolutely insane, but none of them come from a malicious or evil intent.
(As a side note, this is an interesting article published by the Maxwell Institute at BYU on posthumous baptisms in early Christianity.)
Another Mormon writes:
I have personally participated in these baptisms for the dead. Let me first say that I have had some of my most soul-swelling and thought-provoking moments while doing so. I understand the feeling that is conveyed by others that baptisms of their dead might be viewed as offensive, but it helps to remember Mormon doctrine on this issue: those who are baptized by proxy have a choice to accept or reject that baptism. We also believe that personal traits, personalities and characteristics carry forward to the afterlife from this life. Thus, those who wouldn’t have accepted Mormonism on earth (had they had the chance) probably won’t accept Mormonism in heaven.
It’s clear from the Bible that Christ commands us to be baptized. What then happens if people go throughout their lives without the opportunity to be baptized? This has most likely happened billions upon billions of times. Are these people just screwed out of heavenly blessings? No, billions aren’t screwed out of heaven – all have the opportunity to come unto Christ, and to memorialize their devotion to him through baptism.
More reader commentary on our Facebook page.
The Dish 