Spousal permission for baptism


bl8tant
 Share

Recommended Posts

A friend of mine in another state is seriously considering being baptized. This is wonderful news, of course, but even more so because she is married to an abusive drunk. The blessings of the gospel will be extra helpful in her case.

She told me today that she'd found a statement in "Preach My Gospel" (p. 207) that says "Do not baptize a married person without the consent of his or her spouse." I'd never heard of that restriction before-- is it new?

I'd love to understand the rationale behind it; it seems that most spouses would grant permission, but it seems unfair to deny someone the benefits of membership in the church if their spouse withholds permission unrighteously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of mine in another state is seriously considering being baptized. This is wonderful news, of course, but even more so because she is married to an abusive drunk. The blessings of the gospel will be extra helpful in her case.

She told me today that she'd found a statement in "Preach My Gospel" (p. 207) that says "Do not baptize a married person without the consent of his or her spouse." I'd never heard of that restriction before-- is it new?

I'd love to understand the rationale behind it; it seems that most spouses would grant permission, but it seems unfair to deny someone the benefits of membership in the church if their spouse withholds permission unrighteously.

I have heard this before. Since the church is very family oriented and doesn't want to destroy families over a religious dispute, if a spouse wants to be baptized and the other one is extremely against it and says no, then no baptism.

However, if she is married to an abusive drunk, he is already not holding up his part of the marriage so it doesn't matter and she should be able to get baptized.

The church is trying to help families and keep them together. Sounds like her husband is already trying to destroy the family so it doesn't matter what he wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the spouse won't give permission it basically turns one's helpmeet into one's hurtmeet. I imagine the greater number of recent converts with anti spouses don't stay active long. And if the guy is an abusive drunk I'd hate to think what he'd do to her if she ran off and got baptized without his approval.

P.S. A large part of it may also be to avoid cult accusations, "She ran off and joined this cult without telling me!" By requiring permission you have to talk to them about it (baring dishonest tricks).

Edited by Dravin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@crazypotato: that's sort of what I was thinking, but PMG flat-out forbids it-- it doesn't say "prayerfully consider..." or "ask the bishop" or anything equivocal.

@dravin: in this case I think he would withhold approval solely because it's something she wants. I'm not sure that he would do anything because of it, but then there's the rub: with someone like that you're never really sure what will set them off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What circumstances would it be a good idea to baptize someone who's spouse is against it? Even in the case where the spouse is a drunk and typically doesn't care about the wellbeing of the other, if he/she opposes, how can the church dismiss that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@crazypotato: that's sort of what I was thinking, but PMG flat-out forbids it-- it doesn't say "prayerfully consider..." or "ask the bishop" or anything equivocal.

Well the book is primarily aimed at missionaries themselves and missionaries, either because they want to see the person baptized (for genuine reasons or numbers), may engage in manipulation, either intentional or unintentional, to get the desired result. I mean people were executed for the Gospel's sake and the scriptures talk about leaving mother and father for Christ, of course they should be baptized thinks the Elder as he prays (or the investigator after having been fed such scriptures by the missionary)! It is a situation with a lot of emotive appeal and I'm not even sure the Bishop would avoid it.

In any case if their desires are righteous and they live up to the light and knowledge as best as they are able to they won't be denied any blessings in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having been in a relationship with an abusive drunk, well maybe not abusive but surely neglectful (thereby abusing the family by being absent - myself) I say this is good advice.

I also advise her to get away from him as soon as possible; I'm sad that I lost my family (my drinking problem wasn't the only issue, or the biggest), but if she hadn't skipped out, I'm sure I'd never have stopped drinking and come back to the church.

If she leaves him one of two things will happen. 1. He'll stay the same. 2. He'll re-evaluate his life and have to decide which is more important, the booze or his woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two words: unrighteous dominion.

I can more easily understand the church requiring spousal permission before someone takes out their temple endowments. IMHO, the step from "ordinary member" to "endowed member" can be much bigger than the step from nonmember to member. Consider, say, a faithful Baptist who tithes, doesn't drink or smoke, and remains chaste-- if they join the church, their changes are not all that great compared to the covenants we take on at the temple.

It seems to me that denying someone who would otherwise be qualified the opportunity to be baptized is fundamentally interfering with their agency.

Furthermore, we're explicitly warned in the scriptures not to deny an otherwise worthy person the chance of baptism, membership, and full fellowship. Look at Alma's teaching to the Zoramites in Alma 32. It strikes me that this is the same thing, only with a different criterion.

It also raises the question of what other decisions can the church require me to subordinate to my spouse's approval. For one instance that comes to mind, is it OK to require spousal approval before someone accepts a calling? I've seen passionate arguments that (particularly for women) it is insulting and unnecessary to ask a husband to approve of his wife's calling to a position, and I tend to agree. How is this different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In any case if their desires are righteous and they live up to the light and knowledge as best as they are able to they won't be denied any blessings in the long run.

In the long run, we're all dead (or at least that's what Keynes was claimed to have said.) It seems a shame that she, or anyone, should be denied the immediate blessings of baptism and membership.

However, as Mr T said, probably the best idea is for her to consider whether she wants to stay married to him and to make the necessary changes if not. I can't say that I'd recommend divorce to most folks but in her case it would be well justified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, you and I know the blessings and covenants of baptism. However, non-members, especially those who are vehemently opposed, cannot and will not see the good. So, for a couple who remain together and one spouse is so violently opposed, how in the world will that help the marriage? I'm not a bishop nor a mission president, but I can see them counseling that the spouse live up to baptismal covenants and work (that's relative) on gaining permission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me just make sure I'm understanding you correctly bl8tant. Are you accusing the Church of exercising unrighteous dominion in it's policy? Or the spouses who won't give permission? Or both? Or a third party that isn't one of those two choices?

Edited by Dravin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

Let me just make sure I'm understanding you correctly bl8tant, you are accusing the Church of exercising unrighteous dominion in it's policy? A third party I haven't explicitly mentioned?

Link to comment

Dravin, I think that someone who refuses permission for their spouse to be baptized may be exercising unrighteous dominion. I say "may" because I'm sure there are circumstances where refusing might be appropriate, though I can't think of any off the top of my head. In this case, were my friend's husband to refuse it would clearly fall into that area IMHO.

As for the church itself, to me it seems that deciding who may and may not join is part of what it means to be organized as a church. I may disagree with the guidelines, but not with their responsibility to set and enforce them. I know that the priesthood leaders who are responsible for those policies take their responsibility with the utmost seriousness, and I uphold them in doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the church asks the spouses permission before a busy calling so that the spouse will be supportive of whoever for spending more time away from the family. The bishop asks females for permission for their husbands to have busy callings sometimes, and vice versa. It is totally fair. If I get a calling as Young Women's president, for example, it is absolutely necessary for my husband to be on board and willing to support me taking large amounts of time away from my family.

Also, why is she playing the victim to a violent drunk? Are you sure the church is the bad guy here? Or is she dysfunctional, too? She doesn't HAVE to stay married to him. She can go to a women's shelter if needed and get free food and lodging until she finds a job, if he is really that bad. Just because her husband may be too controlling or whatever doesn't mean it is the church's fault for having it's policy, if it is a policy.

I think she should ask the bishop what his handbook says about baptizing someone whose spouse opposes, because like Dravin said, PMG is a handbook for the missionaries, not for the general church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dravin, I think that someone who refuses permission for their spouse to be baptized may be exercising unrighteous dominion. I say "may" because I'm sure there are circumstances where refusing might be appropriate, though I can't think of any off the top of my head. In this case, were my friend's husband to refuse it would clearly fall into that area IMHO.

I have no qualms about the potential for unrighteous decision there (spouses refusing). It's just you opened up with "Two words: unrighteous dominion" and then talked about the Church requiring permission for Endowments so I wasn't sure who it was directed at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, why is she playing the victim to a violent drunk? Are you sure the church is the bad guy here? Or is she dysfunctional, too? She doesn't HAVE to stay married to him. She can go to a women's shelter if needed and get free food and lodging until she finds a job, if he is really that bad. Just because her husband may be too controlling or whatever doesn't mean it is the church's fault for having it's policy, if it is a policy.

I'm not saying that the church is the bad guy, merely trying to understand whether this is a policy and exploring, if so, why it exists.

As for the rest, well, until you walk a mile in someone's shoes... that's all I have to say about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that the church is the bad guy, merely trying to understand whether this is a policy and exploring, if so, why it exists.

As for the rest, well, until you walk a mile in someone's shoes... that's all I have to say about that.

I understand what you are saying about not judging her, but it is one thing to be married to a reasonably decent person who is adamantly opposed to the church, and another thing to be married to a mess. Sometimes, when people have one problem (spouse), they blame it on other stuff (church). And I wasn't trying to be totally unsympathetic, but she does still have her agency. She does live in a free country. It may sound harsh and judgmental, but I didn't intend to sound that way. However, look at all our country and churches have to offer verses some of the middle eastern nations where women have absolutely no rights to religion or divorce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured it'd be more productive to have this conversation in PMs instead of inflicting it on everyone else, but for some reason the site completely disclaims all knowledge of a user named "crazypotato".

You're 100% right that my friend needs to get out of her current situation, and luckily we live in a country where that's possible... to an extent.

She can't got to a shelter because there are no shelters in her area (a large US city) that will allow her to stay with her kids. Why? She has two teenage boys (and an 8-year-old daughter, but who's counting.) Most women's shelters won't allow teenage boys to stay there. I could go on for hours about how unfair and broken this is, but it is what it is.

She currently has no income. Why? She's a school worker, so until the school year starts, she doesn't get paid in the off season. Luckily she just got certified as a teacher, so if she can find an actual teaching job (big if, with the current economy) she will be able to become independent much faster.

She has a major health condition that would bankrupt her were it not for her husband's health insurance.

All of these obstacles are things she can overcome, given time, and she's working on them. I just think it would be easier for her to work on them if she also had the assurance and support of being a church member, and it still doesn't seem fair to me that her jerk husband can cause her to be denied that. She can still attend her local ward, do service projects, attend RS, and so on. Those things are all good, but they're not the same as entering the waters of baptism. If they were, we wouldn't be working so hard as a church to find and baptize people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Send me his address. I've been needing to polish my 32oz framing hammer on the skull of a wife-beating drunk. Its been about 7 years since I polished it last...

Get in line, pal. I would say that I'd flip you for it, but I'd rather flip him... like, off a tall building or something.

(and yes, I realize that's not a very Christlike attitude. I'm working on it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

A little over 8 years ago I came home from work to find the husband (STBX) of my ex-wife's sister standing on my porch and banging on my door. Long story about the guy and why I didn't like him (tried to help the guy out of a couple self-created jams when he went AWOL from the Army and wanted to hide-out at my house). Anyway, I got off my murdercycle and grabbed my tool bag (never left my handtools in the gangbox on the jobsite - liked to have em' at home) and went in through the garage.. to find my ex-sis-in-law, pregnant with a toddler, hiding along side the couch with a black eye and broken nose.

Didn't bother to ask, just took out my 32 oz Estwig framing hammer (yeah, I know, electricians usually use an electrical hammer, but I like the steel handle, heft, and history of it - it was my Grandfather's for 30 years before I got it - something he whined about until the day he died.. he always wanted that hammer back), walked into the front yard, and popped him on the top of his noggin with the claw.

It made this really.. bright popping sound and the claws stuck into his skull. I dragged him out to the street, twisted and pulled (it made another really satisfying vacuum-release pop, kinda like opening a bottle of juice), avoided the spurt of blood and synovial fluid, and kicked him in the.. behind off my property.

When the cops got there I was wiping down my hammer and putting it back in my toolbag. DA filed a 'simple assault' charge, but I plea-bargained pre-trial devergence to giving 40 hours of community service to the local women's shelter doing repairs; something I did anyway with my American Legion Post (100, AZ HQ) regularly anyway.

If I'd known I would have gotten off so easily, I woud have popped him a second time.

Link to comment

I think the church asks the spouses permission before a busy calling so that the spouse will be supportive of whoever for spending more time away from the family. The bishop asks females for permission for their husbands to have busy callings sometimes, and vice versa.

It's not so much asking permission as it is asking for sustaining support. In some cases, the spouse is consulted first to gain insight into whether or not the person being considered for a calling might be up to the job, mentally, emotionally, spiritually, etc. But it's not a permission thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so rebellious.

I think this standing is unfair. I had to wait to be baptized until I was 18 but a spouse? No, a spouse doesn't own me. I'd never let someone interfere with my religious choices. If the church wanted to make an issue of it, I'd just walk away from the church to be honest. But I'm just that adamant that no one will ever stop me from doing what I feel is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like a parent? Or why did you wait until you were 18?

I wasn't allowed to be baptized until I was 18 because my parents really hated the church.

I've also been married twice and both times the men were very controlling. The first marriage was in the temple and he dictated everything to me down to my level of spirituality. (I was too spiritual he said). So I cut back on my prayers and scriptures and eventually, after the divorce, I left the church for a time.

I will never ever again let anyone dictate to me whether or not I should be a member or how much I participate.

I don't think it's fair for the church to tell someone who is worthy that they can't be baptized because of a spouse. Parental permission is different but I don't think it's fair to hand that power over to a husband or wife. Particularly when that spouse will never give consent because they know they sit in the position to deny it to their husband or wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share