Re-marrying after a Death


Recommended Posts

I think you misunderstood. I don't believe he was talking about adultery. I think he was saying that if his wife were widowed and then to remarry, he would not want her in the eternities.

I appreciate the correction and was indeed misunderstanding; but a corrected understanding does not make Rabboni's sentiments any more palatable. If anything it makes them more troubling.

The fundamental conundrum I posit above still exists: Either he doesn't want her because she no longer wants to be with him through the eternities - in which an "I don't want you anyways" attitude smacks of sour grapes at best - or he doesn't want her on the grounds that, since she gave herself to another, he now sees her as "damaged goods" - which would betray a sense of misogyny and vengeance that seem incompatible with most people's ideal of the Celestial Kingdom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the correction and was indeed misunderstanding; but a corrected understanding does not make Rabboni's sentiments any more palatable. If anything it makes them more troubling.

The fundamental conundrum I posit above still exists: Either he doesn't want her because she no longer wants to be with him through the eternities - in which an "I don't want you anyways" attitude smacks of sour grapes at best - or he doesn't want her on the grounds that, since she gave herself to another, he now sees her as "damaged goods" - which would betray a sense of misogyny and vengeance that seem incompatible with most people's ideal of the Celestial Kingdom.

I don't see how this has anything to do with misogyny and/or vengeance. I'm not sure I entirely understand Rabboni's (who apparently has been banned...) sentiments but I don't see how you jump from acknowledging you didn't understand what he was saying to stamping your interpretation of what is behind what you apparently don't understand. I think I had a better understanding of what he said than you and I'm not claiming to understand the feelings behind the statements. The fact that you ascribe a misogynist attitude to his comments is insane given that he has stated that the standard he would apply in relation to his wife is no different than the standard he would expect would be applied to him by his wife. You may not agree with how he views things but to state his comments are misogynistic or vengeful is just... well, it'd be nice if your attack was rooted in what he actually did say.

I don't know what his motivations were for his comments but I can appreciate the general concept or concerns. And it has very little, at least for me, to do with sexuality (and yes, I know for him that was apparently a big deal). If husband were to die and wife remarry then she moves on. If there is one thing I have figured out about life it is that people have an amazing ability to "get over" someone that they are no longer with. Absence makes the heart move on. When a person doesn't get over someone it is less about love and more to do with the loneliness. I would expect that if I died and my wife remarried that her love for whoever she married would replace whatever she had for me. I would never want to be stuck or sealed to someone who has moved on to someone else simply because I was "sealed" to them. To use a simply comparison, I would never want to in this life want to be dating or married to someone who either didn't want to be with me or more to to the point was in love with someone else. Who would??

I asked for people's opinions in this forum some time back about sealings and whether there was any point to getting sealed, given that everyone can just about be sealed to everyone else (I know that's a bit of an exaggeration but the point being men or women -- after death for women -- can be sealed to any number and all of the people they were married to in life) and the answer I frequently heard was it is more important that you are sealed to someone (or anyone) and matters much less that are are sealed to a particular person. I think that's sad, that who you end up with is so much less important than making sure you get sealed -- pretty much is demeaning of the whole concept of eternal love and make the idea of "families are forever" a joke because all it means is that there is some form of forever family but it doesn't mean the one you are actually sealed to here on this earth. But if spouses die, those who live heal, move on and in some cases find someone else so I think the appeal of a forever family for me is just one of those things that is more rooted in childish imaginary desires than in reality.

Before we jump into the whole "we are promised we get to be with who we are sealed with" etc, etc, look at how this thread started -- it's one of those, "who ends up with who and how does it all shake out when x person is sealed to y person BUT..." And what is the response? We don't know, God is good so it will all work out but we have no idea how or who or what. So let's skip the whole "we get to be with our families forever" bit because NO ONE actually knows what that means or more importantly who we end up with or any of that. It's just a guessing game and all bets are off in the end.

So I can appreciate the idea that Rabboni put forth in some degree, or whatever degree I understand it. I probably have very different reasons behind the feelings but I can relate to the feelings. I would never, never get sealed to someone (I know this is going to sound bad but sealings remind me of fascism in the sense that it shares the basic concept that the institution is and always will be more important than the individual). I'm perfectly fine with the "til death do you part" because at least there you know what you are going to get into and if one person dies, if I were to die, there would be no confusion about how it all ends and she can move on to the next guy without any messing strings from the past.

Edited by guast
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good morning, Guast -

Had my comment to which you take exception been made in a vacuum, I would no doubt agree with you that I had acted immoderately.

But they were not. I'll not launch into a lengthy analysis of the posts of someone who can no longer defend himself; but I would respectfully suggest that you do a forum search and see for yourself the sentiments expressed by that poster over the last forty-eight hours. Then decide for yourself whether "I wouldn't want her" boils down to a deferential consideration of the woman's own feelings, or a simple "good riddance" to a woman who rejected the man as her lord and master and thus may be discarded as though she were a defective toy.

I am quite comfortable that my uncharitable analysis of the poster's intentions and attitudes towards women, is entirely justified. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked for people's opinions in this forum some time back about sealings and whether there was any point to getting sealed, given that everyone can just about be sealed to everyone else (I know that's a bit of an exaggeration but the point being men or women -- after death for women -- can be sealed to any number and all of the people they were married to in life) and the answer I frequently heard was it is more important that you are sealed to someone (or anyone) and matters much less that are are sealed to a particular person. I think that's sad, that who you end up with is so much less important than making sure you get sealed -- pretty much is demeaning of the whole concept of eternal love and make the idea of "families are forever" a joke because all it means is that there is some form of forever family but it doesn't mean the one you are actually sealed to here on this earth.

I know we we talk a lot about "togetherness", but if you read the actual scriptures involved and (at the appropriate time) listen to the applicable temple liturgies, it becomes apparent that "togetherness" barely scratches the surface. It isn't that eternal love - even romantic love - isn't important. It's just that it's only a part of a much larger whole.

Before we jump into the whole "we are promised we get to be with who we are sealed with" etc, etc, look at how this thread started -- it's one of those, "who ends up with who and how does it all shake out when x person is sealed to y person BUT..." And what is the response? We don't know, God is good so it will all work out but we have no idea how or who or what. So let's skip the whole "we get to be with our families forever" bit because NO ONE actually knows what that means or more importantly who we end up with or any of that. It's just a guessing game and all bets are off in the end.

I wholeheartedly agree. "Who will I be with, in the Celestial Kingdom?". What does that even mean in an eternal existence where space and time may well be irrelevant, and where the Celestial are all one in Christ Jesus?

The important thing is to honor God, do our best to keep the covenants we make with Him and with our spouse(s), enjoy the blessings He has given us in this life, and look to the day when through the grace of Christ we become joint heirs with Him - whatever that means.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how this has anything to do with misogyny and/or vengeance. I'm not sure I entirely understand Rabboni's (who apparently has been banned...) sentiments but I don't see how you jump from acknowledging you didn't understand what he was saying to stamping your interpretation of what is behind what you apparently don't understand. I think I had a better understanding of what he said than you and I'm not claiming to understand the feelings behind the statements. The fact that you ascribe a misogynist attitude to his comments is insane given that he has stated that the standard he would apply in relation to his wife is no different than the standard he would expect would be applied to him by his wife. You may not agree with how he views things but to state his comments are misogynistic or vengeful is just... well, it'd be nice if your attack was rooted in what he actually did say.

I don't know what his motivations were for his comments but I can appreciate the general concept or concerns. And it has very little, at least for me, to do with sexuality (and yes, I know for him that was apparently a big deal). If husband were to die and wife remarry then she moves on. If there is one thing I have figured out about life it is that people have an amazing ability to "get over" someone that they are no longer with. Absence makes the heart move on. When a person doesn't get over someone it is less about love and more to do with the loneliness. I would expect that if I died and my wife remarried that her love for whoever she married would replace whatever she had for me. I would never want to be stuck or sealed to someone who has moved on to someone else simply because I was "sealed" to them. To use a simply comparison, I would never want to in this life want to be dating or married to someone who either didn't want to be with me or more to to the point was in love with someone else. Who would??

I asked for people's opinions in this forum some time back about sealings and whether there was any point to getting sealed, given that everyone can just about be sealed to everyone else (I know that's a bit of an exaggeration but the point being men or women -- after death for women -- can be sealed to any number and all of the people they were married to in life) and the answer I frequently heard was it is more important that you are sealed to someone (or anyone) and matters much less that are are sealed to a particular person. I think that's sad, that who you end up with is so much less important than making sure you get sealed -- pretty much is demeaning of the whole concept of eternal love and make the idea of "families are forever" a joke because all it means is that there is some form of forever family but it doesn't mean the one you are actually sealed to here on this earth. But if spouses die, those who live heal, move on and in some cases find someone else so I think the appeal of a forever family for me is just one of those things that is more rooted in childish imaginary desires than in reality.

Before we jump into the whole "we are promised we get to be with who we are sealed with" etc, etc, look at how this thread started -- it's one of those, "who ends up with who and how does it all shake out when x person is sealed to y person BUT..." And what is the response? We don't know, God is good so it will all work out but we have no idea how or who or what. So let's skip the whole "we get to be with our families forever" bit because NO ONE actually knows what that means or more importantly who we end up with or any of that. It's just a guessing game and all bets are off in the end.

So I can appreciate the idea that Rabboni put forth in some degree, or whatever degree I understand it. I probably have very different reasons behind the feelings but I can relate to the feelings. I would never, never get sealed to someone (I know this is going to sound bad but sealings remind me of fascism in the sense that it shares the basic concept that the institution is and always will be more important than the individual). I'm perfectly fine with the "til death do you part" because at least there you know what you are going to get into and if one person dies, if I were to die, there would be no confusion about how it all ends and she can move on to the next guy without any messing strings from the past.

I think you have a very narrow concept of love if you believe that widows or widowers who remarry are "replacing" their love for their late spouse. I won't bother to go into any further detail, as I honestly think your mind isn't open to hearing it.

The statement "childish imaginary ideas" shows a lack of understanding about what sealings are all about, and - IMO - shows disrespect for some fundamental concepts and teachings of the Church. I daresay it even shows some arrogance - that you think you know better than what our Heavenly Father would teach us through our leaders. It is one thing to not be able to grasp a concept, it's another thing entirely to reject it because of that.

And I think JAG summed up the misogyny part quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good morning, Guast -

Had my comment to which you take exception been made in a vacuum, I would no doubt agree with you that I had acted immoderately.

But they were not. I'll not launch into a lengthy analysis of the posts of someone who can no longer defend himself; but I would respectfully suggest that you do a forum search and see for yourself the sentiments expressed by that poster over the last forty-eight hours. Then decide for yourself whether "I wouldn't want her" boils down to a deferential consideration of the woman's own feelings, or a simple "good riddance" to a woman who rejected the man as her lord and master and thus may be discarded as though she were a defective toy.

I am quite comfortable that my uncharitable analysis of the poster's intentions and attitudes towards women, is entirely justified. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

Your comments are made in a vacuum because there are those of us (I'm not sure how limited of a group) who don't pore over this forum and don't average over a hundred posts a month. I visit occasionally (more appropriately "infrequently") and post even more rarely. Primarily because I don't have time to funnel substantial amounts of my life into any online forum. I'm also not going to search for his past post for the same reason (with the added caveat "I really don't care" because I am responding to a post and not whatever issues the person has had in other threads that I don't know about).

Maybe that poster is misogynistic, I don't know, but my comments are directed to the posts in this thread. When your comments are less about what he posts in this thread and more about whatever baggage you have with him from other threads then not only are we no longer discussing the subjects of the thread (isn't that the point??) and instead moving onto personal attacks but it leaves the rest of us in the dark who don't track every comment in every thread in this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your comments are made in a vacuum . . .

I believe I invited you to do a forum search. It can be done quite quickly, in point of fact.

If my comments are in a vacuum, it is a vacuum of the reader's own making via his own willful ignorance.

. . . (with the added caveat "I really don't care" because I am responding to a post and not whatever issues the person has had in other threads that I don't know about).

LDS.net describes itself as a "social network forum". One is welcome to blind oneself to the "social network" aspect of that, but one oughtn't then to complain that forum members tend to view posts in light of the poster's cumulative history, rather than taking sound bytes in isolation.

. . .because there are those of us (I'm not sure how limited of a group) who don't pore over this forum and don't average over a hundred posts a month.

Wait - do you mean to tell me there are actually members of this forum whose cumulative number of posts, divided by their length of time as members, averages over a hundred posts per month?

Sheesh. What a bunch of pathetic losers. Those guys must have no real lives whatsoever. Probably dysfunctional adolescent boys living in their mothers' basements . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have a very narrow concept of love if you believe that widows or widowers who remarry are "replacing" their love for their late spouse. I won't bother to go into any further detail, as I honestly think your mind isn't open to hearing it.

The statement "childish imaginary ideas" shows a lack of understanding about what sealings are all about, and - IMO - shows disrespect for some fundamental concepts and teachings of the Church. I daresay it even shows some arrogance - that you think you know better than what our Heavenly Father would teach us through our leaders. It is one thing to not be able to grasp a concept, it's another thing entirely to reject it because of that..

Do you really think that when someone is struggling with a doctrinal concept that the way to endear them to your point of view and make them feel better about the gospel is to call their comments disrespectful and arrogant? You think that you're a good representative for the church when you jump into a you must think you know better than God and his leaders attitude when you take issue with what a person is struggling with?? C'mon, use a little common sense and get past your ego for a second!

You've fixated on one particular phrase that you seem to have pulled from context and put words in my mouth: when I referred to "childish imaginary desires" (seriously, at least quote me correctly...) I was speaking out what we want sealings to be and not what they actually are. Because simply put, we don't exactly know what sealings mean as a practical matter in the next life or even what the family organization is going to look like.

Let me point out a couple things that shouldn't be very difficult to deduce from my comments: 1) I'm to whatever degree involved with the church -- shouldn't be too hard to figure out because I'm in this forum and by the fact I'm not here making anti comments or similar; and 2) there are some key points of doctrine that I struggle with and tried (unsuccessfully) to get some better insight on through this forum, as I referenced in my post you quoted. What may not as easily be deduced but I'll go ahead and share is that I'm teetering between whether I stay in the church or leave. Why is absolutely none of your business (and with the way you responded to my last post I would NEVER share those reasons with you or seek support from you, even if you were my Bishop) but I bring this up because someone may actually care about your responses in the future and people who are struggling with where they fit in with the church or with doctrinal points leave the church over people responding the way you do. Their choices are their choices but it doesn't excuse you for having a patronizing attitude towards another person's struggles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guast, if you are struggling with understanding something, maybe you should just say that instead of making it sound like you have already figured it out. I'm sure Leah would have responded differently if you had said, "I'm really struggling with understanding how the sealing works," rather than saying:

I would never, never get sealed to someone (I know this is going to sound bad but sealings remind me of fascism in the sense that it shares the basic concept that the institution is and always will be more important than the individual). I'm perfectly fine with the "til death do you part" because at least there you know what you are going to get into and if one person dies, if I were to die, there would be no confusion about how it all ends and she can move on to the next guy without any messing strings from the past.

"I would never, never get sealed" doesn't sound like a person who wants to hear what we have to say on the subject. But since you expressed in a subsequent post that you are struggling with this, I will tell you what I think about the question.

Just because there are some people who will end up with someone different than the person they are sealed to doesn't mean that all bets are off. I'm sure for the vast majority of people, they will be with the person they are sealed to, but because some people are married to a person who won't be worthy to be with them in the next life, God will work out the details for those people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guast, if you are struggling with understanding something, maybe you should just say that instead of making it sound like you have already figured it out. I'm sure Leah would have responded differently if you had said, "I'm really struggling with understanding how the sealing works," rather than saying:

"I would never, never get sealed" doesn't sound like a person who wants to hear what we have to say on the subject. But since you expressed in a subsequent post that you are struggling with this, I will tell you what I think about the question.

Just because there are some people who will end up with someone different than the person they are sealed to doesn't mean that all bets are off. I'm sure for the vast majority of people, they will be with the person they are sealed to, but because some people are married to a person who won't be worthy to be with them in the next life, God will work out the details for those people.

Actually had a whole thread asking for help understanding what I struggle with -- the reason I even got a username in the first place. Found no help. I would never, never get sealed because I struggle with that doctrine. It's not that I struggle with understanding how it works (as much as any person can understand it) as much as I struggle with reconciling the "you get to be with this person forever if you both live righteously" that we teach in Sunday school in such absolute terms with the "well, actually we just really don't have any idea who ends up with who or how it works out." And the answers to those kinds of questions are frequently "it doesn't really matter." Well, if it didn't matter then why are we teaching the doctrine in the first place??

The vast majority of people may end up with the person they are sealed to but the reason I said all bets are off is because even if that is true we still do not know who ends up with who are who is part of the majority and who is not, regardless of whether we live righteously and try to do all we can.

Historically we have at least one example of where a woman was married to one man who by all accounts appeared to be righteous and was certainly in good standing and then she was married off and sealed to another while she was still married to and continued to have children with her lawful husband. I can't explain that and wouldn't try except to say it certainly shows that simply marrying someone and being righteous doesn't mean you actually get to be with that person. Any exception proves the rule isn't the rule any longer unless the boundaries of the rule are readjusted.

If the fundamental goal is to be sealed and it doesn't matter whom I am sealed to then I can just as easily pull a name out of the any number of the records of the dead and get sealed to whoever has an appealing name. Then I accomplish all that is required and expected and what I have heard repeatedly is it really doesn't matter who you are sealed to -- just get sealed and don't reject the doctrine! At least then I'm not investing and investing all of myself in something with someone who I actually want to be with that may not work out for reasons that have nothing to do with either of our choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually had a whole thread asking for help understanding what I struggle with -- the reason I even got a username in the first place. Found no help.

I haven't read that thread - I am only responding to your post. I can't be expected to know what attitude of truly seeking understanding you displayed in the past - I only know that here and now, you aren't presenting yourself as someone who is struggling, but as someone who has already decided.

If the fundamental goal is to be sealed and it doesn't matter whom I am sealed to then I can just as easily pull a name out of the any number of the records of the dead and get sealed to whoever has an appealing name. Then I accomplish all that is required and expected and what I have heard repeatedly is it really doesn't matter who you are sealed to -- just get sealed and don't reject the doctrine! At least then I'm not investing and investing all of myself in something with someone who I actually want to be with that may not work out for reasons that have nothing to do with either of our choices.

The point isn't just to get sealed and check it off a checklist. The point is to commit yourself to someone and work toward becoming a righteous husband or wife with them. I could elaborate more on this, but you don't seem open to hearing it, so I won't bother you further with my thoughts.

Edited by tumbledquartz
Fixing html
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read that thread - I am only responding to your post. I can't be expected to know what attitude of truly seeking understanding you displayed in the past - I only know that here and now, you aren't presenting yourself as someone who is struggling, but as someone who has already decided.

According to Just a Guy you are FAILING your responsibilities as a social networker and are not meeting the minimum requirements for internet addiction! :eek:

I wouldn't have expected to you have read that threat, I don't expect you to read it. I was just commenting on its existence, that was all. Yes, I have decided what I am doing in relation to my actions but that's a separate issue from struggling with a doctrinal point. Two different things there.

The point isn't just to get sealed and check it off a checklist. The point is to commit yourself to someone and work toward becoming a righteous husband or wife with them. I could elaborate more on this, but you don't seem open to hearing it, so I won't bother you further with my thoughts.

You can comment if you want, up to you. I'm open to listening to whatever anyone wants to say but don't confuse that with being open to agreeing with everything everyone says. There's a lot of garbage on the internet and these forums are not exempt. That being said, I will listen to anyone and I may get after someone for how they respond but I'm not going to take issue with a person believing what they do (just as I would have preferred an actual response that actually addressed my comments than something to the effect of "you're being arrogant and disrespectful...").

There seems to be quite a few people, and I'm not attributing this to you because I don't think you've weighed in, who have said to the effect it doesn't matter who you end up as long as you are sealed. And I don't think that's necessarily inconsistent with the doctrine of the doctrines as I understand them. I would have been fine with no doctrine about sealing and just being told get married and be a good spouse (I can do that) but what I can't reconcile is the "give all of yourself to another person and if you both live righteously you can be together forever" with the caveat of "not really, we have no idea who ends up with who and the fact that you gave all of yourself to this particular person... it's the principle of it, not about actually being with that person." It, to me, diminishes everything about any promise of being with whomever we are sealed to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually had a whole thread asking for help understanding what I struggle with -- the reason I even got a username in the first place. Found no help. I would never, never get sealed because I struggle with that doctrine. It's not that I struggle with understanding how it works (as much as any person can understand it) as much as I struggle with reconciling the "you get to be with this person forever if you both live righteously" that we teach in Sunday school in such absolute terms with the "well, actually we just really don't have any idea who ends up with who or how it works out." And the answers to those kinds of questions are frequently "it doesn't really matter." Well, if it didn't matter then why are we teaching the doctrine in the first place??

For some reason, "perspective is everything" comes to mind here. If we're worrying about and getting depressed for such things as "I'm stuck with him/her for eternity and I don't want to be" bemoans the love God has for his children and flies in the face that he wants the best for us. Before we get to the judgment bar, I believe, it will all be worked out and made right. This is a mortal life where mistakes are made. We're not going to had over to our Heavenly Father a church where there is still chaos and there are folks who are sealed to someone they don't want to be sealed to.

Who we will end up with can pretty well be known. I can bet my parents will end up staying together because they still are after 50 years. But I can also bet that my ex-wife, whom I am technically sealed to, may end up with someone else. All the intricacies of how this all happens will all be dealt with.

We can understand only so much in this life with our mortal minds about the mechanics of how sealings work. Let's not get bogged down with the details we're stuck speculating about for lack of information. This life is for us to do the best we can with what we know and learn all while seeking the guidance of our Father in Heaven. To worry about the "what if's" is useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am married and sealed to my husband. I will never be sealed to anyone else, and almost certainly will never be married to anyone else. As long as we're striving to keep our covenants, we will be together.

My parents have been married 54 years. Neither of them will ever be sealed to anyone else. If they keep striving to keep their covenants, they will be together.

My grandparents were sealed. My grandpa died and 20 years later, Grandma remarried. She wasn't sealed to her second husband. If she and grandpa kapt/keep their covenants, they will be together.

Some people lose a spouse, choose to remarry, and are sealed to another. Those are the times that we don't know precisely what will happen, but we have faith that if covenants are kept, Heavenly Father will work it all out for the best. Is that what you have an issue with, gaust? Because I can't think of any other possible scenario where we would say that we don't know who we'll end up with, and it doesn't matter. I promise you that in all the scenarios above, the people matter, to each other and to Heavenly Father. The work we've all put in to make our marriages good matters. The covenants we've made and kept to each other matter. I don't understand what you're talking about or where you're coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the main purposes of the Temple is the sealing of families. When a husband and wife are sealed together, their children have the privileges and blessings of the sealing covenant. I personally don't know what all those blessings and privileges entail. But this I know from the scriptures:

Malachi 4:5-6 "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse." D&C 2:2-3 "And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers. If it were not so, the whole earth would be utterly wasted at his coming." And D&C 138:48 "Foreshadowing the great work to be done in the temples of the Lord in the dispensation of the fulness of times, for the redemption of the dead, and the sealing of the children to their parents, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse and utterly wasted at his coming."

The whole earth will be smitten with a curse and utterly wasted at his coming if temple work is not done? This sounds very dire indeed. And I have to ask myself, "why would the earth be cursed and wasted if temple work is not done? Obviously, temple work is essential to the Plan. The sealing of parents/children is part of God's plan. He wants us to have the blessings of the sealing covenant.

As a parent, I find great comfort in the sealing covenant. Boyd K. Packer has said this: “It is not uncommon for responsible parents to lose one of their children, for a time, to influences over which they have no control. They agonize over rebellious sons or daughters. They are puzzled over why they are so helpless when they have tried so hard to do what they should.

“It is my conviction that those wicked influences one day will be overruled. …

“We cannot overemphasize the value of temple marriage, the binding ties of the sealing ordinance, and the standards of worthiness required of them. When parents keep the covenants they have made at the altar of the temple, their children will be forever bound to them” (“Our Moral Environment,” Ensign, May 1992, 68).

This has great meaning and comfort for me. I had a 19 year old daughter die in a car accident. She was an unwed mother and left behind a 2 month old baby son. Not only do I know that I will see her again in the next life, but I know that through the atonement of Christ, her sins will be forgiven, as will mine. I know that through the sealing covenant, she is bound to me and my husband. Does that mean she will live within our household in the next life? Probably not. She will have her own. But, she is still bound to me and my husband through the sealing covenant and there is a familial structure within God's family. What a wonderful blessing this is! Just knowing that the Lord wants us to bind our families together through the sealing covenant is good enough for me. I have faith/trust that there is a purpose behind the Sealing. I want to do all in my power to follow what the Savior would have me do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you really think that when someone is struggling with a doctrinal concept that the way to endear them to your point of view and make them feel better about the gospel is to call their comments disrespectful and arrogant? You think that you're a good representative for the church when you jump into a you must think you know better than God and his leaders attitude when you take issue with what a person is struggling with?? C'mon, use a little common sense and get past your ego for a second!

You've fixated on one particular phrase that you seem to have pulled from context and put words in my mouth: when I referred to "childish imaginary desires" (seriously, at least quote me correctly...) I was speaking out what we want sealings to be and not what they actually are. Because simply put, we don't exactly know what sealings mean as a practical matter in the next life or even what the family organization is going to look like.

Let me point out a couple things that shouldn't be very difficult to deduce from my comments: 1) I'm to whatever degree involved with the church -- shouldn't be too hard to figure out because I'm in this forum and by the fact I'm not here making anti comments or similar; and 2) there are some key points of doctrine that I struggle with and tried (unsuccessfully) to get some better insight on through this forum, as I referenced in my post you quoted. What may not as easily be deduced but I'll go ahead and share is that I'm teetering between whether I stay in the church or leave. Why is absolutely none of your business (and with the way you responded to my last post I would NEVER share those reasons with you or seek support from you, even if you were my Bishop) but I bring this up because someone may actually care about your responses in the future and people who are struggling with where they fit in with the church or with doctrinal points leave the church over people responding the way you do. Their choices are their choices but it doesn't excuse you for having a patronizing attitude towards another person's struggles.

Do you feel better now? Did you get all of your anger and condescension and judgment out? Did it help to direct those feelings at the wrong person?

How can you be "struggling" with a concept when you have declared it "childish"? That's not the statement of an open, inquiring, humble mind. That's the statement of someone who has made up his mind. Someone who has decided that he knows better than Heavenly Father and the church leaders.

Do not blame your choice of whether to stay in the church or leave on the actions or words of another person. It is YOUR life, YOUR free agency, YOUR choice. No one is responsible for that but you. You've been told truth, you rejected it. That is YOUR choice. You cannot assign responsibility to others for that which YOU alone are responsible. Take responsibility for your choices.

If you leave the church it is because YOU chose to. Don't absolve yourself of responsibility by pointing the finger at someone else, assigning qualities and making accusations that exist only in your mind.

The gospel is either true or it is not. This is either the restored church or it is not. Finding fault and assigning blame to church members over perceived slights doesn't change this.

Your statement that you would "never, ever" get sealed because you struggle with the doctrine frankly baffles me. Do you not trust the teachings of Heavenly Father and our prophets? No one fully comprehends how sealings are going to work out in the eternities. It simply isn't possible for us to know at this time. But people who get sealed do so on faith. Can you not have enough faith that Heavenly Father knows what he is doing? Do you not trust His plan? It's not about understanding everything perfectly or having the answers to every question. Faith has to come into play at some point.

I stand by my previous post. Disagree with it all you want. That's part of your free agency. But what are you going to tell Heavenly Father when he asks why you left? Are you going to tell him it's because you rejected one of His covenants? That you think He got it all wrong? Are you going to tell him that it's because you didn't like what some stranger posted on an internet board? Are you going to say "It's not my fault, she made me do it"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guast, saying "here is a doctrine of substance and depth, one which we do not completely understand but which still gives us comfort and hope" is much different from saying "here is a doctrine, the meaning of which we have no clue." The doctrine of eternal sealing is of the former type, but you seem to feel it is of the latter type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

Do you feel better now? Did you get all of your anger and condescension and judgment out? Did it help to direct those feelings at the wrong person?

How can you be "struggling" with a concept when you have declared it "childish"? That's not the statement of an open, inquiring, humble mind. That's the statement of someone who has made up his mind. Someone who has decided that he knows better than Heavenly Father and the church leaders.

Do not blame your choice of whether to stay in the church or leave on the actions or words of another person. It is YOUR life, YOUR free agency, YOUR choice. No one is responsible for that but you. You've been told truth, you rejected it. That is YOUR choice. You cannot assign responsibility to others for that which YOU alone are responsible. Take responsibility for your choices.

If you leave the church it is because YOU chose to. Don't absolve yourself of responsibility by pointing the finger at someone else, assigning qualities and making accusations that exist only in your mind.

The gospel is either true or it is not. This is either the restored church or it is not. Finding fault and assigning blame to church members over perceived slights doesn't change this.

Your statement that you would "never, ever" get sealed because you struggle with the doctrine frankly baffles me. Do you not trust the teachings of Heavenly Father and our prophets? No one fully comprehends how sealings are going to work out in the eternities. It simply isn't possible for us to know at this time. But people who get sealed do so on faith. Can you not have enough faith that Heavenly Father knows what he is doing? Do you not trust His plan? It's not about understanding everything perfectly or having the answers to every question. Faith has to come into play at some point.

I stand by my previous post. Disagree with it all you want. That's part of your free agency. But what are you going to tell Heavenly Father when he asks why you left? Are you going to tell him it's because you rejected one of His covenants? That you think He got it all wrong? Are you going to tell him that it's because you didn't like what some stranger posted on an internet board? Are you going to say "It's not my fault, she made me do it"?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I don't give a (_____ fill in whatever you want) about your opinion. But in the interest of those who might be off-put by your obnoxious responses I commented and stated: I bring this up because someone may actually care about your responses in the future and people who are struggling with where they fit in with the church or with doctrinal points leave the church over people responding the way you do.

.

I get that you are in a position where you think you have all the answers and can instruct all but don't. Don't. You come across as abrasive and rude and if you haven't quite figured out how grossly and absolutely inappropriate it is to lecture ANY person on how judgment before God in the last day will go down for that person then just stay off the internet, grow up and spend some time worrying about yourself rather than others . Just as you point out you are a stranger to me, I'm a stranger to you and you have NO place adding your ridiculous commentary, even in the form of rhetorical questions, on my standing before God. Or anyone else for that matter, even people you know. That is disgustingly offensive.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share