mikewilliams

Yep, I hear that. A similar thing happened to me when I received the Melchizedek priesthood. They couldn't find a record of my receiving the Aaronic. But that was the point. I have seen the printout of her living ordinances, she got them at her last tithing settlement. It's not on there. Thanks for the help people :)

rameumpton - See that makes sense.... So obviously they don't do a records check when it happens, otherwise that wouldn't be an issue. IMHO, they should probably institute, one. It wouldnt take long, and would fix a security issue. That still leaves my question unanswered. If they don't do a records check (which wouldn't matter to me, because the records are updated), how would they know that we were any different than any other couple getting sealed for the first time? And why would it matter, if they even knew? Because they dont have to "take my word." They have access to the online church record system, and they could check. Which still doesnt make any sense. Because if it was a matter of not being allowed to "take someones word," then couples who were getting sealed for the first time would need to have a paper that was in effect the opposite of a cancellation. To prove that they had not been sealed prior.

rameumpton - Interesting. How exactly would people use it to have polygamous marriages sealed in the temple? When they scan your recommend the last name of whoever you are sealed to (if you are female) is shown in parenthesis after their name. Also, your records would state if you are currently sealed to anyone, under living ordinances. It just doesnt seem like you could get around that, at least not easily. Or without help from someone working there. Anyway... Backroads - Its required. Fair enough. I know this, and dont disupute it. Theoretically, how would they even know to ask, or enforce this if the cancellation has been processed and the records updated? Perhaps the records would show they were at one time sealed, but then it would obviously state that they were no longer sealed, rendered the hard copy unnecessary. Anyway, this was and still is, about curiosity. It's not a big deal, not enough to make an appointment with my Bishop and ask officially. I just figured the all-powerful internet might have answers. So.... I ask.

It is odd, but not really very inconvenient. It is a piece of paper, much like the other pieces of paper required for the event. I am mostly just curious to the reasoning. That may be the reason; that usually the cancellation is recent, so the records may not be in order. I thought perhaps they wanted to know because the sealing ceremony may be different, but as far as I can find out, it is not. In our case, it isn't recent, and the records are in order. Have been for some time. As far as I know, the computer system at the temple is not separate, but a part of the larger church system/records. Since I know they are in order, and it has been quite a while, why is it even necessary for them to be aware? btw, thanks to everyone for replying to my post, it is much appreciated.

What paperwork do we need to do there? The temple recommends, rec for living ord etc... will be obtained before the day, the marriage licence earlier that day. Neither of us have children, so there is no complication there. I could understand that perhaps the cancellation is sometimes received before the records are updated, but this is not an issue for us. Why else would it need to be shown?

would it not be simpler to get a copy of living ordnances (I usually am given one during tithing settlement)? it will say if they are sealed to a former spouse.

My girlfriend and I are both members of the church with current recommends. She was previously divorced and has previously received a sealing cancellation. We are planning on being married in the near future and I have some questions about two things; She is told that she needs to present the sealing cancellation at the temple before the sealing, why is this? Is there any difference in the sealing ceremony for someone who has been divorced prior, sealed prior, etc...? I'm not asking for specifics on the second one, just a yes or no.