John Turner: Mormons and Baptism by Proxy – WSJ.com

John Turner: Mormons and Baptism by Proxy – WSJ.com

John Turner plays a fair hand on this contentious topic, but ignores some fairly significant information in the process in claiming that

Baptism by proxy has its roots in early Mormonism, when adherents were troubled by the fact that their ancestors had died before the 1830 founding of what became the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Mormon prophet Joseph Smith taught that baptism was necessary for salvation and that only those baptisms performed by the true, restored church counted. That left the vast bulk of humanity on the outside looking in.

Smith wanted to offer a second chance to those who had died. Bringing to life an obscure New Testament passage about believers being "baptized for the dead," he announced that his followers could seek baptism on behalf of their departed kin.

Much of the commentary repeats the usual outrage, but one Ken Kuykendall adds the missing information in his comments. This should be more widely known, but sadly, will be ignored.

”Baptism by proxy,” your columnist asserts, “has its roots in early Mormonism …”.
Please then explain these references to baptism by proxy, dating not only from the time of Paul in the first century A.D., but winding through at least 12 centuries of Christian history:
“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they baptized for their dead?” 1 Corinthians 15:29 (New Revised Translation) “This verse is part of Paul’s argumentation against those who denied a future resurrection. … The text seems to speak plainly enough about a practice within the [1st century Christian] Church of vicarious baptism for the dead. This is the view of most contemporary [scholars].” –Krister Stendahl, former dean of the Harvard Divinity School
In about 225 A.D., an early church leader taught that part of the calling of John the Baptist was not only to be born on earth before Christ, but also to die before Christ, so that he could be the forerunner of the Savior in the spirit world, where they were to preach the gospel as they had in this world. Hippolytus, On Christ and the Antichrist 5, 45, in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus … Series Graeca (Paris: 1857-66, 161 volumes) (10:764).
In about 240 A.D., the philosopher Celsus, mocking the doctrine of salvation for the dead, asked one of the early church leaders: “Don’t you people actually tell about [Christ], that when he had failed to convert the people of this earth he went down to the underworld to try to convert the people down there?” The answer was a detailed, “Yes.” Origen, Against Celsus II, 43, in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus … Series Graeca (Paris: 1857-66, 161 volumes) (11:864-65).
From about 350 A.D.: “It is necessary … for them to come up through the water in order to be made alive; for otherwise none can enter the Kingdom of God … therefore even the dead receive the seal. … The seal is of course, the water [baptism].” Shepherd of Hermas, Similitudes III, 9, 16; following texts given in Max Dressel, Patrum Apostolicorum Opera (Leipzig, 1863), 548-49, 631.
In about 380 A.D., the Bishop of Milan wrote: “Fearing that a dead person who had never been baptized would be resurrected badly or not at all, a living person would be baptized in the name of the dead one.” Ambrose, Commentaria in Epistolam I ad Corinthios in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus … Series Latina (Paris: 1844-64, 221 volumes) (17:280).
In about 400 A.D., the Bishop of Salamis wrote: “From Asia and Gaul has reached us the account of a certain practice, namely that when any die without baptism among them, they baptize others in their place and in their name, so that, rising in the resurrection, they will not have to pay the penalty of having failed to receive baptism.” Epiphanius, Against Heresies I, 28, 6 in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus … Series Graeca (Paris: 1857-66, 161 volumes) (41:384).
In the 9th century, the Bishop of Halberstadt said this of the “primitive” church: “If their loved ones happened to depart this life without the grace of baptism, some living person would be baptized in his name: and they believed that the baptism of the living would profit the dead.” Haymon Halberstatensis, Expositio Sancti Pauli in Epistolam I ad Corinthios, in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus … Series Latina (Paris: 1844-64, 221 volumes) (117:598).
At the end of the 12th century, St. Bruno recalled that certain of the early Christians in New Testament times “would baptize themselves in the place of a dead parent who had never heard the gospel, thereby securing the salvation of a father or a mother in the resurrection.” Expositio in Epistolam I ad Corinthios xv 29, in Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologiae Cursus Completus … Series Latina (Paris: 1844-64, 221 volumes) (153:209).

Facebook Comments Box

Ropootbopeer

Parents sometime find it convenient to speak in another language to keep their conversations private without having to go, you know, somewhere private. Pity then the poor parents who are monolingual. My parents were in this group. Sure, they each had learned a few word or phrases in Italian or Spanish growing up, but nothing useful in any real sense. As a result, when I was very young, my parents would frequently use “op-talk” to speak of things in front of us so that we could not understand them. Op, ubby-dubby, egg-Latin and other such English variants were once popular just as Pig-Latin sometimes is and consist of inserting some short sound immediate preceding the vowel in each syllable of a word as you speak.

Often, as my sister and I were riding around in the back seat of the family car, our parents would carry on a conversation in “op” believing that we were none the wiser to topic at hand. And they were right, but that doesn’t mean that we were not listening.

As with any language, dialect or code, with enough exposure, you begin to recognize repeated sounds and patterns. You just need some kind of key – a recognizable link between the language you know and that being heard. For me and for my sister, that key was ropootbopeer.

As I recall, it was my father who spoke the word. My parents were discussing where to take us for dinner or a snack that night and in the exchange my father said, “ropootbopeer”. That was the key! Rop-oot bop-eer. My sister and I yelled “root beer!” in unison and the code was broken forever.

For almost everyone who has leaned a second language, there comes a turning point when the whole thing starts to make sense; you stop translating each word in your head and actually start thinking and speaking in the new language. When I finally caught the vision of verb conjugation in Spanish, not only did Spanish start making sense to me, but I found that English also became more clear. Rules I never grasped in school were suddenly obvious to me.

The Gospel also has its own language and syntax and until you recognize the key that unlocks the code, it will never truly make sense and cannot become your primary dialect. That key is the Atonement.

Until you come to an understanding of this singular event, the Gospel of Jesus Christ will ever be a foreign tongue. You may be able to repeat the words, perform the actions, but like that year of high school Latin or the semester of French in college, it is just so much clutter in your mental library. Though it may be useful to you at times and you may even gain some deep affection for it, it does not in any way define who you are. However, once your spirit is moved and you step into the bindingly bright dawn of realization of the magnitude of your Savior’s love – once the Holy Ghost clears away the clutter and confusion of this world and you are swept away by the tsunami of emotion that descends on your soul as you see clearly for the first time the Eternal paradox of your own feeble insignificance contrasted against the depth and breadth of your Redeemer’s compassion for you – only then do you begin to think and live as one of His own.

This testimony of the Atonement is the master key that unlocks the language of Christianity. One may go through the motions and may even feel affection for the Jesus and His followers, but he will never be at home there until that testimony is gained.

Without the Atonement, church is just another social club. With the Atonement, it is everything.

And once that testimony is obtained, he is forever changed, emboldened, awestruck; simultaneously humbled by his insignificance and ennobled by his own infinite potential.

This is the present tense of the Gospel; from here you can learn the preterit, future, conditional, and subjunctive cases, come to know the verbs, adverbs, nouns, adjectives, conjunctions, and prepositions. (I know; never end a sentence with a proposition. Sue me.) Jesus loves me. He atoned for my sins and vanquished death for me. He lives. Jesus is the Christ, the Only Begotten of the Father. My Father in Heaven loves me. I am a son of God. I lived before I came to earth and have an Eternal destiny. Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God. The Book of Mormon is a true and sacred record. There is a living prophet on the earth today… I need to do my Home Teaching.

Facebook Comments Box

Any Surprises Here?

Americans Certify Second Amendment, Divided Over Gun Laws | Angus Reid Public Opinion

A majority of respondents endorse the “shall-issue” prerogative to deal with the question of concealed carry.

Most people in the United States agree on the meaning of the Second Amendment, and half endorse the “shall-issue” prerogative to carry concealed weapons in public, a new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,009 American adults, 85 per cent of respondents believe that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution means that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms, while only seven per cent openly disagree with this view.

I didn’t see any.

Facebook Comments Box

You Can’t HANDLE the TRUTH!

John Berlau and Trey Kovacs: Romney and the Burden of Double Taxation – WSJ.com

The former Bain Capital CEO and Massachusetts governor caused a brouhaha last week when he estimated the tax rate on his investment income at 15%. "How unfair!" pundits exclaimed, noting that the top marginal rate for wage income is more than 30%.

The tax rate on investors is unfair, but for the opposite reason. Our tax code layers taxation of dividends and capital gains on top of a top corporate tax rate of 35%—which even President Obama acknowledges is one of the highest in the world.

This is ironically the embodiment of the "corporate personhood" legal doctrine otherwise so decried by the left. The law taxes corporations as if they were separate beings from the shareholders who own them and then levies a separate tax on shareholder payouts and gains. This double taxation brings the effective tax rate on investment income to as much as 44.75%.

In other words, after the combined top tax rates hit $100 of corporate income, $55.25 remains for the investor. And this figure doesn’t even include various state and local taxes, or the death tax. Moreover, like the rest of us, Mr. Romney paid income taxes before investing, except on pretax contributions such as an IRA or 401(k).

Facebook Comments Box

Eight is Enough…in Iowa

So Mittens, the Mitster, ABO won the Iowa caucus by 8 votes over Rick Santorum.

He shrugged off the promise of sharper criticism from his rivals.
"I’ve got a big target on me now," Romney said, adding that doesn’t faze him. "I’ve got broad shoulders. I’m willing to handle it."

This should continue to be great theater. On to New Hampshire.

Facebook Comments Box