photolove24 Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 So I have a question for whoever can answer it. I’ve talked to a lot of people who I feel can’t give me a good answer, and I really want someone to put my mind to ease with this because it really has me bothered. So here’s the situation, my brother and sister in law are getting sealed on Friday. My sister in law was previously sealed to someone for only 5 months before she met my brother. They got married and had a child, all while she was still technically sealed to this other man. Her sealing to the previous man is now canceled which is why she and my brother are getting sealed on Friday. However, my 2 year old nephew cannot join in the sealing ceremony because he was already born under the covenant. Can someone please explain this to me. Does this mean that my nephew is sealed to my sister in law’s ex husband, because he was born under the covenant of their sealing?? My heart breaks for my brother that he can’t have his child sealed to him on Friday. So if someone could explain to me why this is, or give me some reassurance that this doesn’t mean that my nephew is sealed to another man who isn’t his father, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time for reading this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZenMormon Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Hey photo, I understand your concern. Because your nephew is sealed to you sister in law and her ex husband, when it comes time for the resurrection your nephew will get to chose who he wants to go with. I learned that because the same thing happened to me, my mom had her sealing canceled. She was told that us kids would get to chose who we wanted to go with in the resurrection. I hope this helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daybreak79 Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 If your nephew's biological father was to ever give up his parental rights and allow your brother to legally adopt him, then I believe your brother and nephew could be sealed. Also remember that just because you are sealed to someone that does not take away a persons agency in the other world, choices will still be made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 If your nephew's biological father was to ever give up his parental rights and allow your brother to legally adopt him, then I believe your brother and nephew could be sealed. Also remember that just because you are sealed to someone that does not take away a persons agency in the other world, choices will still be made.My understanding is... the child's biological father is her brother. The woman got divorced but is still sealed to her ex-husband, married the OPs brother, had a child born under the woman's covenant with her ex-husband...Crazy world we live in.But yeah, the boy gets to choose. I don't know if a child can unseal himself from his parents... but I do know that in cases where children is sealed to parents who don't honor their covenants, they are not left hanging without a leg to stand on... they can choose to join another celestial family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 If your nephew's biological father was to ever give up his parental rights and allow your brother to legally adopt him, then I believe your brother and nephew could be sealed. Also remember that just because you are sealed to someone that does not take away a persons agency in the other world, choices will still be made.Perhaps the OP can clarify, because the language is a little muddy, but here's how I'm reading it.Woman married and sealed to man. Woman divorced from man.Woman married to OP's brother. Woman still sealed to other man. Woman has OP's brother's child. Because woman is still sealed to other man, OP's brother's child is born in the covenant sealed to woman and other man.I don't think the child is the ex's child. I think it's the OP's brother's biological child. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Not to be picky..but it's not born under covenant..it's born in the covenant. (BIC). :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennarator Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Ok...now this makes me think, too. We have had a hard time getting our bishop to move on our cancelation. We want a child together. I sure hope we can get the cancellation and new saling done before a child comes! I would be very frusterated if the same thing happened to us. I feel for your brother, photo. Of course he would want to be sealed to his child. I would be really mad if my new chhild was sealed to my ex when it isn't even HIS child! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apexviper13 Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 I understand your concern. I do wonder why the child cannot be sealed to both the biological and step fathers since adults may be sealed to other people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarginOfError Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 I hate to be the voice of cold, heartless, reason, but it doesn't matter. Under ideal circumstances, the child is going to grow up, find a spouse of his own, get sealed to her, at which point it is irrelevant which parents he is sealed to. Furthermore, Born in the Covenant status really only has two meanings 1) We don't have to do sealings to parents when the kid dies 2) The parents have the privileges of the sealing covenant with respect to raising that child. In the handbooks, we read, "Being born in the covenant entitles children to an eternal parentage, depending on their faithfulness." It does not mandate that the eternal parentage is the parentage under which covenant they are born. Reading further we find, "Members who have concerns about the eternal nature of such relationships can find peace in the knowledge that Heavenly Father is loving and just. He will ensure that eternal family relationships will be fair and right for all who keep their covenants." (Handbook 1, 3.6.2) My general advice to people on these matters is to point out that administrative policies in our temporal existence are very unlikely to be representative of those of the eternities. Priesthood authority is not bound by policy, but by truth and right. We are usually better served worrying about raising our kids to be successful, spiritual, and compassionate human being with the skills and attitudes worthy of celestial glory in the here and now than we are to worry about what family they will be assigned if they even get there. I promise, everything will be placed in order for everyone to have the greatest eternal happiness for which they qualify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennarator Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 All I have to say is that divorces are messy. Good thing HEavenly Father has a plan and is going to get everything straightened out when the time comes. I do have faith in that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 I hate to be the voice of cold, heartless, reason, but ...Oh quit lying. We all know you love to be the voice of cold, heartless, reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 The child is sealed to his mother, and his mother to her current husband. Such will be worked out appropriately in the world to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Oh quit lying. We all know you love to be the voice of cold, heartless, reason. I'm not saying a word. Not ONE word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gruden Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 Just to clarify, posterity goes to the husband in sealing/covenant matters, not the mother. If the man remains righteous, the priesthood bonds to the children belong to him in the eternities, despite what judges in earthly courts rule. In this particular case, that might be different. The most important thing is that the boy has the blessings of sealing covenants, and everything else is secondary. Our hearts should break for those that have never had this. The boy will be all right because he has the blessings, one way or another. If the OP's brother endures to the end, I have no doubt it will be fine for him and his son. I myself was not born in the covenant and never sealed to anyone but my wife. In my case this is probably not important, but there may very well be cases where righteous parents may be able to retrieve wayward children because of those priesthood bonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 Just to clarify, posterity goes to the husband in sealing/covenant matters, not the mother.I would really like to know the source of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 All I have to say is that divorces are messy. Good thing HEavenly Father has a plan and is going to get everything straightened out when the time comes. I do have faith in that.And we're in the process of screwing things up so badly, it's going to take 1000 years to fix it all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gruden Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 I would really like to know the source of this.Go to the temple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 Go to the temple.If that's the case, then it's your interpretation from something in the temple ceremony. Additional, Most everything in the Temple can be found in scriptures. So where does this one come from? Or is it what you interpreted yourself? Because I can assure you, God is not a misogynist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlf9999 Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 (edited) I can tell you what my PB says regarding that. I was told my children were assigned to me but it said I should look for a suitable wife. In the case of the OP, that seems to explain why the boy does not go with the mother. Don't ask me where that can be confirmed elsewhere but I am given to understand it that way. I don't know if that is the same with everyone. But when you take in to account the doctrine that the wife holds the priesthood through her husband, that would tend to make a little more sense. The family is a patriarchal order not a matriarchal one. I won't get into the reasoning because women would likely take some exception to it. But it has something to do with men needing to be developed more and therefore they have to take on more accountability and that female's need to be more humble... OK, I added that last one. Edited April 23, 2011 by jlf9999 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gruden Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 (edited) The family is a patriarchal order not a matriarchal one.That's the key right there.In a live sealing, is the woman brought to the man or vice-versa? In this we also see the reason for the law of chastity, because genealogy needs to be preserved in order so that posterity can be kept in order (among other reasons).I know this is an emotional issue so I'm not going to press it too much. If you wish to hunt through the Journal of Discourses I'm sure those who look will find more on this. One important thing to remember is that the man must be righteous to keep his posterity and have it expanded. I realize that the patriarchal order has been used all too frequently by some to justify unrighteous dominion. Those men will be sadly disappointed in the last day when they have nothing. Heaven is very flexible in these things, and dead links can be replaced with good ones. Edited April 23, 2011 by gruden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 If you wish to hunt through the Journal of Discourses I'm sure those who look will find more on this.And there is the issue. I've had to retract posts because I posted something, got challenged, then when I couldn't find it, or re-read it and found the context, intent and meaning to be different from what I posted, I admitted my error, apologized, and posted what I found to be the real meaning or interpretation. And on went the discussion with a semblance of integrity. So when you put forth an idea or doctrinal point, at least I would expect you to be able to back it up with sources, not pass the baton by saying that you know it to be right, so it's for me to look it up myself. Otherwise, it is opinion without any doctrinal, scriptural or prophetic basis and meant to be take with a pinch of salt as a comment meant as an attempt to be controversial, without any basis nor meaning behind it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 On this site, when someone makes a comment based on fact, it is the responsibility of that said person to provide references to back up their comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 I think some read too much into the Patriarchal covenant. Modern prophets tell us that husband and wife are equal. To quote the Journal of Discourses is to pretend that things spoken 150 years ago can trump modern prophets. How about studying the Proclamation on the Family, and see what it says, instead. Otherwise, we may as well believe that exaltation requires polygamy and that Adam is God the Father. Personally, I will follow the living prophets. Oh, and the temple says nothing regarding who the kids would end up with. So, let's not extrapolate doctrine from suppositions that are not based in fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarginOfError Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 And I might repeat what I said before: Priesthood authority is not limited by temporal policy. I'll also add that it it not limited by our own interpretations of scripture and doctrine. The only thing that can limit Priesthood authority is the will of those whose power it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlf9999 Posted April 24, 2011 Report Share Posted April 24, 2011 And I might repeat what I said before: Priesthood authority is not limited by temporal policy. I'll also add that it it not limited by our own interpretations of scripture and doctrine. The only thing that can limit Priesthood authority is the will of those whose power it is.By that do you mean the priesthood holder is the master of his own destiny? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.