Genealogy Chat

Ann... I couldn't agree with you more. I visited the LDS centre in Kensington last week and was overwhelmed by the amount of free information there. They even have the Scottish bmds on film. I was like a kid let loose in a sweetshop.... so much so that I ended up not getting much info at all as I was darting from one thing to another. Planning another visit very soon and hope to be more disciplined. I ordered 2 films. One I paid £4.50 for and it will be kept at the Kensington centre (it has the baptism of my great, great greadmother on it) and the other £2.60 which will be available for me to look at for a month. What would we do without the worlds geneologists? Jean x.

I find the term 'loathing' somewhat offesive [but that's just my personal opinion] even if it was used without thinking but I accept that fact that much about the subject is said in ignorance. What I find ironic is that individuals who 'complain' about the 'practice' are willing to search the site for the information contained therein. If it offends people, then they should have the courage of their convictions and not use the site. Maybe they should find some other site that will give them as much information? The LDS Church does not have to have this site in the public domain. They can limit it to member's use only but will not do so. How many will still 'complain' when they have finally put ALL of their records on computer for ALL to search?

Lynda You are perfectly entitled to have an opinion about anything, and you don't need to apologise! I don't think you have upset anyone, either! OC

Sorry for the late reply, have been to work. As I said it was only my opinion, and perhaps I should'nt have used the word loathsome, but I find it an arrogant thing for a religion to do.Having said that I do find their site, sometimes, helpful if only as a rough idea for something. Sorry if I have upset anybody, off again to work

Does it really matter anyway? If you are of the C of E faith, then you can only be baptised ONCE. If you have already been baptised as C of E, then that is the only baptism which 'takes' and a subsequent 'sealing of the dead' by the LDS faith is irrelevant. If you havent already been baptised into any faith at all, then presumably you didnt care enough during your lifetime to do anything about it - so, again, it really doesn't matter. OC

Lynda, The LDS believe that those who have died have the chance to accept or reject the baptism that was done for them.

May be so, but if you arent a willing participant in a baptism and an ancestor being dead makes them a strong contender for not being willing, then why worry about it? The LDS have set up their site for this to happen - it wasnt done commercially for all us bods to use but we are getting the benefit of it. It doesnt sound like an accurate entry anyway!

Many thanks for the reply. I sincerely hope that the martha I found is'nt my 5xG.Grandmother, I also hope that they have their God with them. My opinion only, but I find that practise loathsome. Again many thanks

The record was submitted by a Church member which means that a vicarious baptism was performed in 1959. There is no record available of those who submitted the entry due to the laws on privacy

Have been looking on the LDS site for my 5xG.Grandmother, martha whitehouse brn tipton staffs abt 1763. Came across a martha which I thought could be mine. No church was named for the baptism was I clicked on the number for the film. That came up titled endowment for the dead with baptisms for the dead. Does this mean that this martha has been inducted into the mormon faith