- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
😯 Just received a really nasty shock, a relative of mine 200 years ago seems to have been involved in a child murder, or at least neglect/abuse. I have uncovered some curious figures doing my ancestral research, but this . . .About the only consolation I have is that said person was not a direct ancestor of mine, she would have been a child of my ancestor’s sister.
Erm, what to say? I’ve been expecting to find criminals – hanged, or slave dealers in my ancestry, this is another thing entirely.
Is it any surprise this is one family story, I haven’t heard? Got to balance out the good with the bad, I’ve been able to add about three/four generations onto my maternal grandfather’s line…
[edit to add – I’ve decided to try and do temple work for her victim’s family…]
Quote:Is it any surprise this is one family story, I haven’t heard?
Yeah, that would be one to white-wash if you’re a family historian highlighting the glory of your ancestry.
😆 On a serious note, do the work. We can’t know all the details, and even something as horrible as this sounds . . .
To decide not to do the work would imply they are not worth it. I don’t think that is our place to judge. Whether the person we are serving is living or dead, I think we should try to serve with hope it will benefit them, and not just pick those we think are worthy of our service. It is an interesting lesson about learning about history or our ancestors, there is a risk we may not like what we find…but I still think that is important to learn. That’s fascinating (in a scary way). All the metaphysical aspects aside, I’ve found it very interesting to learn about my own ancestry and their stories. There is something really cool about feeling that connection and learning what people have been through to end up with me as the actor currently on the stage of life. Back to the subject of doing temple work. On one hand, I understand that reflex to judge others in the past and feel like we should give the thumbs up or thumbs down on their salvation. But doing temple work for someone, in Mormon theology, NEVER bypasses the judgement of God. Doing the temple work for a “bad” person doesn’t exonerate them or give them a free pass to the CK. I think, looking into the mechanics of the idea, that it is more about the notions of universal access to potential exaltation. We in fact are NOT to be the judges, leaving this in the hands of The Lord. We do the service and perform the rituals in an act of “saving” all of humanity, often focusing on our ancestors in particular. Jesus Christ didn’t atone for the sins of only the good people. He paid the price for all the people who really don’t deserve it. In fact, none of us deserve it. None of us are good enough. It’s just that some of us fail more spectacularly than others (like murderers, etc.). Nevertheless, the Atonement is a gift made available to all. IT ISN’T FAIR! by design. But do we really want justice? Or do we only want mercy for us, and everyone else should get the justice they deserve? (an interesting thing to introspectively ponder and meditate upon).
That’s what I think about this problem of doing temple work for the infamous. We are called to focus on our past and those who gave us life, and form that “weld” or connection with them, for better or worse — they gave us life. It’s our responsibility to muddle through our own mortal probation, to make a go at it as best we can, and make the best of our time while we act on the stage of this world for a short period.
I’ve been reading up on the case in a number of books. I found out about this googling her name, and it is the same person. She got five years for it in a French prison, a light sentence at the time. Basically, her employer became widowed. She was a thirty something spinster and appears to have been interested in him, but he remarried someone else. She took it out on other people, which included a skull fracture which eventually killed the person in question. She did certain other cruel things, for bizarre reasons I won’t go into here, as well.
She appears in at least four books on crime I know of, one of them being a French language selection of true life crime stories.
On another note, there must be quite a few members out there descended from Danites I suppose…
Quote:On one hand, I understand that reflex to judge others in the past and feel like we should give the thumbs up or thumbs down on their salvation. But doing temple work for someone, in Mormon theology, NEVER bypasses the judgement of God. Doing the temple work for a “bad” person doesn’t exonerate them or give them a free pass to the CK. I think, looking into the mechanics of the idea, that it is more about the notions of universal access to potential exaltation. We in fact are NOT to be the judges, leaving this in the hands of The Lord. We do the service and perform the rituals in an act of “saving” all of humanity, often focusing on our ancestors in particular.
I get what you’re saying here. I would have never have known all this stuff if it hadn’t have been for a websearch, and the work would have been done anyway. Surely many church members have done temple work for criminals etc without knoing it.
Just one thing I want to mention: Given the nature of medicine at that time, and especially the state of physchological understanding, we have no way of knowing what “forces” were at work with this woman. Was she bi-polar – or did she have split or multiple personalities – or was she high functioning schizophrenic (or subject in some other way to paranoia) – or any other possible “explanation” for her bizarre and troubling behavior?
I always try to keep in mind that our theology says that those who are not capable of understanding their actions and/or, I believe, controlling them are not held accountable for them – and the number of people who would be in that situation relative to LOTS of actions is FAR higher in the past than it is now, imo.
We simply can’t make fully-informed judgments about ANYONE in that regard, even those who are the closest to us (and, probably, even ourselves, if we are talking about FULLY-informed judgments) – and it gets exponentially more difficult (impossible in practical terms) the further removed we are from them in any way.
That’s why I have no problem whatsoever with the concept of doing vicarious work for literally everyone, no matter what we find out about them.
Sometimes these concepts are good in intent, like doing ancestry work, and taking names to the temple to provide them with the opportunities of baptism and temple blessings. Temple work for the dead is a relief for overcoming fears of “what if they die before accepting the gospel?” But then reality sometimes unravels the beauty of it at a simplistic level. You find out they weren’t good people (murderers) and then it becomes sticky.
That bothers me some. Even to take the concept of vicarious work in general, and say what a great thing that is so now we can feel good about our doctrine of baptism being essential for salvation. But really, you can only go so far back in history with finding names of people … and then what? Everyone else that was born before we had records are screwed?
It seems like God would make a way for them to have equal chances for salvation. But then if that means there are other ways besides temple work, why do we care to do temple work?
:problem: It seems like I get caught in that line of thinking, and then just try to tell myself, we don’t know. So what is important, is that we are trying in this life to do what we can, and doing genealogy and temple work is a good thing to help us learn lessons and experience good works. Beyond that, we have to leave it in God’s hands to figure out.
And that is how I would approach the murderer in the records. We can’t know their circumstance, and it doesn’t literally matter. What matters is Sambee was doing good works, and he’ll be blessed for doing so.
Is there any other way to look at it that makes sense?
Nope, not in my mind. The work is for us, not literally for the dead, imo. I haven’t released the full details on here for reasons of privacy, but I have sent Ray and Brian the details of this hair raising case. Quote:Given the nature of medicine at that time, and especially the state of physchological understanding, we have no way of knowing what “forces” were at work with this woman. Was she bi-polar – or did she have split or multiple personalities – or was she high functioning schizophrenic (or subject in some other way to paranoia) – or any other possible “explanation” for her bizarre and troubling behavior?
There’s certain a cultural element to the whole thing from what I know of it, which ties in with the tough morality of the 19th century, along with the frustrated spinster business. There are also social issues, her father went bankrupt, so she had no dowry, so there was a matter of status loss here. She appears to have been jilted too.
As for her psychology, there isn’t enough to go on, bar a sadistic streak. Possibly paranoia of a kind. Due to the nature of genetics, I won’t have inherited the same genes as her, since our male and female lines are different, despite us being related. Any of my problems come from elsewhere!
Quote:What matters is Sambee was doing good works, and he’ll be blessed for doing so.
Better make it clear that I haven’t done her work, but I will be doing the work for her sisters (at the very least) in the future. Someone had better speak French, because their names are, erm, very French… I’m also going to have work done for someone with a long German name, that ought to be fun too.
PiperAlpha wrote:That bothers me some. Even to take the concept of vicarious work in general, and say what a great thing that is so now we can feel good about our doctrine of baptism being essential for salvation. But really, you can only go so far back in history with finding names of people … and then what? Everyone else that was born before we had records are screwed?
Traditional Protestant Christianity deals with this very struggle over the need to accept Christ before one can be saved. Karl Rahner in his book “Christianity and the Non-Christian Religions” had an important insight:
Karl Rahner wrote:[Christianity cannot] simply confront the member of an extra-Christian religion as a mere non-Christian but as someone who can and must already be regarded in this or that respect as an anonymous Christian. It would be wrong to regard the pagan as someone who has not yet been touched in any way by God’s grace and truth.
God will strive with each of his children and will never turn his back on them…none will ever be “screwed.” The concept of temple work is a nod in this direction, a symbol that God does not despair – but still seeks after his lost sheep.
Perfectly put, Roy. Temple work is a symbol of that, or a nod in that direction, not a cure-all. :clap: I think that helps bring meaning to why it is still important.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.