Sealing Powers and Parental salvation?

[grauchy123]

Question for you guys I hope to get an answer on. I am a former devout Mormon (now resigned) and I came from a devout LDS family.

Since leaving the church my parents have expressed that me leaving the church has put an extra level of responsibility on their shoulders. My parents claim that if they are even more righteous now they can invoke the sealing powers of the temple and bring their children into the Celestial Kingdom with them.

It sounds like all that dynastic sealing stuff that went on in early church history. But I haven't heard anyone teach or talk about that stuff in recent days. Is this still a real LDS Doctrine? It just seems really unhealthy because they have taken an extra burden upon themselves and I can see the pressure is killing them. Especially since I'm their second child to leave the church.

I'd like to know if you have any sources to show that this is a false doctrine. If so that would be great I think it would really lift that burden from their shoulders. Then again if it is a real LDS Doctrine that would be good to know also.

[Dravin]

Is this what you are talking about? Look under the heading "What is the fate of the wayward?", Mormonism and culture/Wayward family members - FAIRMormon. Note also there is a link at the end of that section to additional quotes.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Dravin

[grauchy123]

Is this what you are talking about? Look under the heading "What is the fate of the wayward?", Mormonism and culture/Wayward family members - FAIRMormon. Note also there is a link at the end of that section to additional quotes.

Thanks for the article. I did see one quote there that seems to support my parent's idea.

If you succeed in passing through these trials and afflictions and receive a resurrection, you will, by the power of the Priesthood, work and labor, as the Son of God has, until you get all your sons and daughters in the path of exaltation and glory. This is just as sure as that the sun rose this morning over yonder mountains. Therefore, mourn not because all your sons and daughters do not follow in the path that you have marked out to them, or give heed to your counsels. Inasmuch as we succeed in securing eternal glory, and stand as saviors, and as kings and priests to our God, we will save our posterity.

Lorenzo Snow, "Preaching the Gospel in the Spirit World," in Brian H. Stuy (editor), Collected Discourses: Delivered by Wilford Woodruff, his two counselors, the twelve apostles, and others, 1868–1898, 5 vols., (Woodland Hills, Utah: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987–1989), 3:364. [Discourse given on 6 October 1893.]

But that's a pretty obscure reference and I'm sure my parents have never read that. I'm still left wondering where they have gotten this.

[applepansy]

Do you really think that proving this a false doctrine will relieve your parents worry for you and your sibling?

[Vort]

Do you really think that proving this a false doctrine will relieve your parents worry for you and your sibling?

Honestly, I think we all know the answer.

[Dravin]

But that's a pretty obscure reference and I'm sure my parents have never read that. I'm still left wondering where they have gotten this.

Keep in mind that conference talks can make some fairly obscure references. With that thought in mind the source given in the article is what the authors are choosing to source it to and not the only way one could come across such a quote. For instance with the King Follet discourse, I could source someone's journal of it, or maybe a scholarly work, or I could source the recent Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith for certain segments of it. If I sourced the journal or scholarly work it would be by all appearances a very obscure reference but you'd be missing that parts of it made it into the official Church curriculum a few years ago.

The only way to know just what reference your parents have personally encoutered is to use the radical tactic known as: asking them. Of course they may not be familiar with a specific reference. I'm vaguely familiar with the doctrine in question, I've heard the idea before, but I don't know if it was in official curriculum, in a conference talk, some comment in Gospel Doctrine, or from my parents.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Dravin

[grauchy123]

Do you really think that proving this a false doctrine will relieve your parents worry for you and your sibling?

Is it healthy for them to think that they now carry the burden and stress themselves out? I honestly don't know which is better. Besides I'm still not clear on if it even is a false doctrine. Do you have any input?

[Dravin]

Here we go, a (relatively) recent conference address:

“The Prophet Joseph Smith declared—and he never taught more comforting doctrine—that the eternal sealings of faithful parents and the divine promises made to them for valiant service in the Cause of Truth, would save not only themselves, but likewise their posterity. Though some of the sheep may wander, the eye of the Shepherd is upon them, and sooner or later they will feel the tentacles of Divine Providence reaching out after them and drawing them back to the fold. Either in this life or the life to come, they will return. They will have to pay their debt to justice; they will suffer for their sins; and may tread a thorny path; but if it leads them at last, like the penitent Prodigal, to a loving and forgiving father’s heart and home, the painful experience will not have been in vain. Pray for your careless and disobedient children; hold on to them with your faith. Hope on, trust on, till you see the salvation of God.” 8

A principle in this statement that is often overlooked is that they must fully repent and “suffer for their sins” and “pay their debt to justice.” I recognize that now is the time “to prepare to meet God.” 9 If the repentance of the wayward children does not happen in this life, is it still possible for the cords of the sealing to be strong enough for them yet to work out their repentance? In the Doctrine and Covenants we are told, “The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances of the house of God,

“And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation.” 10

Link: Dear Are the Sheep That Have Wandered - general-conference

[beefche]

Here is a thread that talks about this subject and gives some quotes that I think you are thinking of:

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/40694-wayward-children-born-under-covenant.html

[grauchy123]

The only way to know just what reference your parents have personally encoutered is to use the radical tactic known as: asking them. Of course they may not be familiar with a specific reference. I'm vaguely familiar with the doctrine in question, I've heard the idea before, but I don't know if it was in official curriculum, in a conference talk, some comment in Gospel Doctrine, or from my parents.

I did that when we had the discussion but they didn't know. They aren't the type to have source references on hand. They just know it. That's why I've come here to ask where you guys think they might have gotten this teaching from.

My parents are in their mid 60s if you think that might be important.

[Dravin]

I did that when we had the discussion but they didn't know. They aren't the type to have source references on hand. They just know it. That's why I've come here to ask where you guys think they might have gotten this teaching from.

My parents are in their mid 60s if you think that might be important.

Well if they can't remember then no definitive answer of where they heard it is possible. We can just supply likely candidates and references. As I noted above, I've got a conference reference from 2003. Should be contemporary enough. Beefche's link is replete with reference, I know that some of them are things like the Journal of Discourses, but they get quoted enough by manuals and members alike that I wouldn't discount them as valid sources for where they heard it.

Of course where they heard it is kind of a tangent isn't it? The real question is in the legitimacy of the doctrine, and by all accounts it is legitimate as far as it goes (I don't know your parents specific understanding). I personally think they are off in thinking they need to be more righteous (than they would need to be if they didn't have wayward children), though that's probably just a linguistic issue. There thinking is probably along the lines that they need to make sure to remain faithful for those promises to be fulfilled and by all appearance such reasoning is not remiss.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Dravin

[grauchy123]

Thanks for the input guys.

Sounds like this is a real LDS Doctrine. I guess I'm still learning more and more about Mormonism even after leaving it. Still though, it seems like a cop-out and a freebie for me to get into the CK on based on the righteousness of my parents. Just doesn't make sense to me but neither does the rest of it which is why I'm no longer in.

God Bless!

[applepansy]

Is it healthy for them to think that they now carry the burden and stress themselves out? I honestly don't know which is better. Besides I'm still not clear on if it even is a false doctrine. Do you have any input?

You didn't answer my question. It doesn't matter whether its healthy or not. Your parents believe and they will worry. You don't get to decide what they believe or worry about. They love you and they will worry.

[Dravin]

Still though, it seems like a cop-out and a freebie for me to get into the CK on based on the righteousness of my parents.

It should be noted that the conference article I quoted points out that repentance on the part of the wayward child is still required. So it's not really a freebie for you.

[grauchy123]

It should be noted that the conference article I quoted points out that repentance on the part of the wayward child is still required. So it's not really a freebie for you.

Ah good, so maybe that's the part that my parent's have overlooked. Besides, I am a practicing believing Christian so I don't really see myself as any more wayward or in need of repentance than any given Mormon.

Edited June 8, 2012 by grauchy123

[Vort]

Just doesn't make sense to me but neither does the rest of it which is why I'm no longer in.

Everyone who believes grauchy's story was a true and heartfelt effort to help his parents and not merely an excuse to bag on the Church as done above, say Aye.

<crickets>

[grauchy123]

You didn't answer my question. It doesn't matter whether its healthy or not. Your parents believe and they will worry. You don't get to decide what they believe or worry about. They love you and they will worry.

You're right of course. I just wish I could take that worry away from them.

[Dravin]

Ah good, so maybe that's the part that my parent's have overlooked.

Except it doesn't change the role they play in all this, just the role you play in this. Remaining true and faithful is still the best thing they can do for you. But that would be the case even without this particular doctrine. Don't get me wrong, they may have overlooked that aspect of things as you propose but if they stop overlooking it, it won't change anything really.

[Shawn_]

This might help:

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church...

Approaching Mormon Doctrine

I don't think it's official doctrine that parents can save their children no matter what. That just doesn't fit with doctrine about sin and punishment.

[Dravin]

Everyone who believes grauchy's story was a true and heartfelt effort to help his parents and not merely an excuse to bag on the Church as done above, say Aye.

<crickets>

Aye.

I don't find it hard to believe that he's sincere in his motivations to end his parents worry. I think it's a bit naive to think that armed with the say so of internet folks (because baring an official statement disclaiming things that's what this thread would amount to if we concluded it was false). If anything it'd be inclined to cause more worry because they might suspect it's his first step on the road to being an angry ex-mormon anti, but his motive? I'm willing to believe it.

[applepansy]

Thanks for the input guys.

Sounds like this is a real LDS Doctrine. I guess I'm still learning more and more about Mormonism even after leaving it. Still though, it seems like a cop-out and a freebie for me to get into the CK on based on the righteousness of my parents. Just doesn't make sense to me but neither does the rest of it which is why I'm no longer in.

God Bless!

You still get to choose and you'll still have to accept Christ's sacrifice or pay for your sins yourself.

[grauchy123]

You still get to choose and you'll still have to accept Christ's sacrifice or pay for your sins yourself.

I guess I don't see how that has anything to do with the righteousness of my parents

[applepansy]

I guess I don't see how that has anything to do with the righteousness of my parents

Their righteousness and sacrifice makes it possible to receive a blessing that requires a greater sacrifice. Having a child turn their heart around is one of those things I'd sacrifice for. I pray my children have an Alma the Younger moment. I hope I live righteously enough to qualify for that blessing.

I don't know how else to answer you than that.

[Guest]

I guess I don't see how that has anything to do with the righteousness of my parents

It doesn't.

The entire premise of the thing is that as long as each and every one of us is righteous then we get to live in the CK. Nobody can live righteously for somebody else. Not even your parents. The opposite is also true, the sins of your parents can't be put on your head... hence, we are only responsible for our sins and not for Adam's transgressions.

But, that said, there is much to say for living righteously to provide an example, a path, a light, to our children. We are promised that if we live righteously our children will eventually follow... if not in mortality then after death. But, that's just parents showing their children the path, children will still have to walk that path to gain their own reward.

As faithful LDS members, we believe that the restored gospel leads us to happiness. As human beings, we seek happiness. Therefore, we believe that our example of faithfulness to Christ's teaching will make us happy and this happiness is what the children will see and want for themselves. My children, so far, are doing okay following the gospel. But whether they grow up to become wayward children or not, I still feel that I need to remain in the path of righteousness as much as I can with my own entire being not just for me but for my kids.

So yeah, your parents love you. They will worry regardless. It's just part of being parents. When you have your own children, you'll do the same.

Edited June 8, 2012 by anatess

[Just_A_Guy]

I guess I don't see how that has anything to do with the righteousness of my parents

I think the practical application would be something along the lines that as the parent tries to behave as decently, honorably, and generally "Christian" as possible, the child both recognizes that righteous behavior and feels the influence of the Spirit in the parent's life. Those influences would hopefully cause the child to reconsider and perhaps accept the tenets of his childhood religion that he once thought unacceptable.

It may also be that there's some kind of not-easily-articulated power that pertains to the sealing covenant itself, but IMHO it's really problematic to reconcile that with the idea of personal agency that Mormons tend to hold dear.