- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I may not be completely accurate in my understanding of the current temple sealing policy so someone please correct me if I am not. My understanding is that LDS men can be sealed in the temple to multiple women in the case of the death of a previous spouse. The sealing to the deceased spouse continues allowing the man to be sealed to another woman. However, If an LDS woman loses her husband to death, she cannot be sealed to another man unless the previous sealing is broken. In the case of divorce, a man can maintain the sealing to his now divorced/living wife and be sealed to another woman as long as there is approval from the divorced wife. A cancellation of the first sealing is not necessary if the divorced wife gives her permission. My understanding is that even if the divorced wife objects or does not agree to cancel the sealing, the man MAY still gain permission eventually to be sealed to the second wife. In the case of divorce for an LDS woman, my understanding is that she may be sealed to another man ONLY if the first husband agrees to the cancellation of the sealing and under no circumstances may maintain a sealing to the divorced husband AND be sealed to a second husband.
In other words, current practice allows for LDS men to be sealed to multiple women in both the case of death or divorce. LDS women, however, may only be sealed to one man on this earth regardless of the circumstances.
I have two thoughts around this practice:
1. How can it be anything but an extension of the doctrine and practice of plural marriage?
2. It bothers me that outwardly the church is very quick to point out (almost laugh off) that plural marriage was something done long ago and should not even be mentioned or considered when speaking of modern Mormonism. Of course nothing is mentioned of the fact that we still practice this at least in terms of “plural sealings”. The church still clings to this doctrine and practice as far as they are legally allowed. It is disingenous or almost dishonest to downplay plual marriage for public relations reasons while men are allowed to be sealed to multiple women on this earth and women can only be sealed to one man.
As an aside – I understand from a Bishop of single adults that there is a real trend in the church currently for LDS couples who have divorced or lost a spouse to death to just remarry civally and not be sealed to a future spouse. There are even informal single LDS groups consisting soley of widows and widowers who socialize with one another largely with the intent and understanding that they will not break their sealings or take on a second sealing. In other words, they are openly looking to remarry civally only.
There is a fairly lengthy post about this exact topic here. I will look for it and provide the link, if I can find it. Here it is:
I think you are accurately (more or less) describing an understanding of policies on sealing, as they were practiced for quite a while. I also think there have been changes in policy the past several years that drift away from that situation. I don’t think they do as much un-sealing (if that is a word) as they used to. I believe they just seal people who are married and request the ordinance, not worry so much about who was sealed to who in the past. It’s a little more of seal ’em all, and led God sort ’em out. (to paraphrase the old war cliche’)
I don’t think you’re accurate about divorces. A divorced spouse doesn’t have any power over the previous spouse regarding a new potential sealing. Previous spouses are asked if there is anything that should be considered (such as alimony, child support, abuse, etc) that may conflict with a temple sealing. If there are no issues, it doesn’t matter what a previous spouse says (man or woman). If a person (let’s assume woman in this case) wants to be sealed and is worthy of a temple sealing, the man can’t block her from getting sealed (and vice-versa). If a man isn’t paying child support, however, that could block the temple sealing. Thanks for the link Ray to the previous discussion. I like the fact that the church has moved away from previous policies that caused a lot of pain, frustration and were obviously linked to plural marriage principles. I like the fact that the church has evolved and is evolving to more reasonable, Christlike stances on many things. But it does reinforce my strong belief that God reveals His will directly through our LDS leaders on a VERY limited basis – leaving the vast majority to the best efforts of good men and women.
One thing I learned recently with temple work for the dead is a woman may be sealed to every husband she was married to while living. Then as they say “the Lord will work it out”. I don’t fully understand why it can happen after everyone is dead but not while someone involved is still living. I agree Orson. It doesn’t seem fair or right to me either. Orson wrote:I don’t fully understand why it can happen after everyone is dead but not while someone involved is still living.
Maybe it’s just easier and less messy to wait until they are dead, end of story. If it was allowed while some or all of the people are living, it is de facto polygamy. If I was married and divorced 5 times (sequentially of course), and me and all my ex-wives were still alive, and then I was sealed to them individually, we would be “married” (at least religiously even if not legally, which is the exact strategy the Fundamentalists use).
Good point Brian, I’m sure it’s something like that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.