Geneology

[LT04]

It's sad that there hasn't been any activity here for as long as there has. I guess that it just goes to reinforce the thuth that LDS members are into geneology as much as nonmembers.

[miztrniceguy]

It's sad that there hasn't been any activity here for as long as there has. I guess that it just goes to reinforce the thuth that LDS members are into geneology as much as nonmembers.

maybe those into geneology are to busy doing it than taking time to post about it

[mom_of_jcchlsm]

Just got back from the Temple - took my son for the first time this morning. We had a stack of family names -- no Temple welfare for us!

I guess this just is not the place I go to discuss genealogy. Workin' on it all the time, though . . .

[Brother Dorsey]

It's sad that there hasn't been any activity here for as long as there has. I guess that it just goes to reinforce the thuth that LDS members are into geneology as much as nonmembers.

I had a wonderful spiritually edifying experience at the Temple last Thursday night....our ward did youth Baptisms for the dead and this was the first time I was able to bring any of my ancestors names to the Temple. I have been working very hard the past couple of years to get correct dates and places and have even traced the patriarical side of my family back to the year 846. (anything past the 15th century is considered not reliable anyway). Regardless I was able to Baptise by proxy with my son and daughter both sets of Grand Parents, all four sets of Great Grandparents and all 8 sets of Great-Great Grandparents as well as my Great-Great-Great Grandfather Dorsey. I was then given the priviledge of confirming them. It was overwhelming as the Spirit of the Lord touched me deeply and confirmed to me that my relatives were waiting for this day...and all had accepted the saving ordinances. I don't think the Lord himself could have stopped my tears of utter Joy that evening and when I walked out of that Temple I knew they were dancing in Paradise!!! I have to wait only 6 more months and I can do my Fathers work. I am the only one in my family who is a member of the church and right now, the only one who can do this work...geneology is priority in my life....my heart has been turned to my fahters. Whay a joy it is to be able to do this work.!

[LT04]

Thats great that their are so many of you out there.

Even better that you actively engage in temple work!

I have found that more nonLDS use the LDS genealogy tools than LDS do. I work at the family history center in my area several wards consolidate into it. We have about as many nonLDS on the staff as we do LDS. In this case I think its a very good thing, seeing as I have never seen a member of the church (not on the staff) go in there, unless s/he was new and made a wrong turn.

Maybe I'm misinturpiting this. The church has made it very clear they plan to abolish tiny history centers like the one I work and put everything on the internet.

[MaidservantX]

It seems odd that family history centers of any size would be abolished since they are helping so many people with their families of any faith; and also becomes a missionary tool at that point -- and introduction anyway. People are always going to need a smiling, helpful 'live' person to help them get started with the Family History, Internet or no. I'm glad you are one of them! Keep up the good work!

[mom_of_jcchlsm]

I don't know what the LDS population distibution is in your area, but it might help to look at it this way:

If LDS represent about 2% of the general population in your area but 30% of the Family History Library users, then LDS are actualy using the service 21 times more than their non-LDS counterparts. (that's (30/2)/(70/98) - hope I did my math right).

[LT04]

Mom you bring up a good point. LDS represent about 2% of the family history center users (excluding the staff [ the staff is about 50-50 split]). The church represents less than 2% of the general population for several counties around. Catholic's claim more than 80% The rest are mostly Anglican (althoe that may change due to recent leadership changes on the national level). After that Methodist take whats left with trace amounts of other groups.

On another note:

One night in the family history center a young woman came and said "Oh good someone here I have a situation I can't solve." Here is a question I have come across that has stumped every one I have asked maybe your collective knowledge can help:

1) Her mother was sealed to her first husband.

2) Her bio. parents were never sealed together.

3) She was born in the covenant because her mother is sealed to her first husband.

4) Her father has never been to the temple, nor will he be. (He has chosen to leave the church some years ago, and actively serves as a Baptist lay minister.)

Question: Does she do the genealogy for her mothers first husband b/c thats the father figure who she is sealed to?

[mom_of_jcchlsm]

I'd say: research both lines and do Temple work for all of them, as much as you can. The Temple will allow you to submit work if you can show a relationship to the parson - she certainly has as much relationship via blood as she does by being raised by the other "dad." By doing the work for both lines, she may greatly help other distant relatives who want/need that info but don't have as ready access to it. It can never hurt to reserach and submit the lineage to family search.

Here's another stumper. It's my screwed up family.

My great great grandfather's oldest and youngest sons were 16 years apart. The older son married a widdow with two children. When his stepdaughter was 14, he got her pregnant. His youngest brother married the pregnant girl and raised the child as his own. That child was my grandfather.

So I haven't decided yet how to seal this family. Should my grandfather be sealed to the Dad who raised him or to his biological father? Either way, the next generation up is the same, since they were brothers.

[LT04]

I didn't explain the situation well, sorry. Let me try to again:

A) Mom (person 1) gets married to her first husband (person 2) in the temple.

B) P1 gets divorced from P2.

C) P2 leaves the church going back to the Jewish faith he was born with.

D) P1 gets married to P3 not in the temple.

E) P1 and P3 have a child (P4).

F) P3 leaves the church never having gone to the temple.

G) P4 wants to know should she do any temple work for P2, whom she never met and is not related to in any way. She has been doing work for P1 (bio. mother) and P3 (bio. father) her parents who she was raised by. The only connection P4 has to P2 is her mother was sealed to him before she was born, thus allowing her to be born under the covenant.

H) The church has standing agreements with several other churches (mostly Jewish) that you can only submit temple work for "your" ancestors. Submitting work for any one else would be a violation of the standing policy of the church. Does she have any claim with P3, even though they have never met, are not related and due to the nature of the divorce never wants to meet if she could help it.

I think thats a better description of the situation. It has a lot of people here stumped.

P.S. (RE: mom) Does the church have a policy that you are aware of about being sealed to adopted parent vs bio. parents?

[Guest MrsS]

I didn't explain the situation well, sorry. Let me try to again:

A) Mom (person 1) gets married to her first husband (person 2) in the temple.

B) P1 gets divorced from P2.

C) P2 leaves the church going back to the Jewish faith he was born with.

D) P1 gets married to P3 not in the temple.

E) P1 and P3 have a child (P4).

F) P3 leaves the church never having gone to the temple.

G) P4 wants to know should she do any temple work for P2, whom she never met and is not related to in any way. She has been doing work for P1 (bio. mother) and P3 (bio. father) her parents who she was raised by. The only connection P4 has to P2 is her mother was sealed to him before she was born, thus allowing her to be born under the covenant.

H) The church has standing agreements with several other churches (mostly Jewish) that you can only submit temple work for "your" ancestors. Submitting work for any one else would be a violation of the standing policy of the church.That has been the standing procedure in the Church since the Church has been doing vicarious work for the dead. It has been the overeager eejits in this Church who have mucked it all up in their Got-to-Earn-My-Way-Into-Heaven-attitude who then submitted celebrity names whether they were related to them or not. Again, let me express my unsolicited, candid, opinion of those who did and are still doing that. THEY ARE EEEJITS! And they should be banned from every submitting work, willy nilly. EEEJITS I say!

Does she have any claim with P3, even though they have never met, are not related and due to the nature of the divorce never wants to meet if she could help it.How in the world can you say she is not related to P3? He is her biological father. That is pretty related to me. Unless you are saying that Mom was pregnent with daughter when she married person 3.

I think thats a better description of the situation. It has a lot of people here stumped.

P.S. (RE: mom) Does the church have a policy that you are aware of about being sealed to adopted parent vs bio. parents? YES the Church DOES have a policy.

. . . . Has this been taken to the Ward Consultant at all? Stake Family History Consultant? If not, try that route. If the Stake cannot help you than go up the line. If need be, call SLC.

In (g) you state:

(g) P4 wants to know should she do any temple work for P2, whom she never met and is not related to in any way.

then in (h) you contradict that with:

(h) Does she have any claim with P3, even though they have never met, are not related

Which is it?

[LT04]

Sorry I ment does she have any claim with P2. I called our local temple they didn't know and couldn't give me a number to SLC.

[Guest MrsS]

Sorry I ment does she have any claim with P2. I called our local temple they didn't know and couldn't give me a number to SLC.

Did you go through the Family History Consultants, both at the Ward level and the Stake? If so, then THEY should take it further up the food chain for this member.

[LT04]

I am at the stake level. The next level is the temple. So we called the temple and were given very indecisive answers.

[Guest MrsS]

You are a Stake Family History Consultant?

Who at the Temple did you talk to? The operator or the Temple President?

Here is the number for the Family History Library, SLC 801-240-2616 call them!

[LT04]

Thank you I'll give them a jingle and let you know what they have to say.

[MaidservantX]

First of all, how do you know that the child in the matter is born in the covenant? Was she told at some point she was born in the covenant, or was she just guessing? I'm not saying that she's not, if the sealing of P1 and P2 is apparently active and unbroken, but if she is NOT their child, how can she be attached by sealing? And please don't refer me to the law of Levirate, I'm aware of that, and maybe that does apply -- but is that the only reason why? (Just pointing out a thought I had, hmmmm.)

Also, I know for a fact that my mother has done geneological research and submitted names to the temple (for which I did proxy initiatory) on lines tangential to her lines, and NOT her direct ancestors. These were people connect by shirt tails, but not by blood.

Here's my family. My bio mom and bio dad married in the temple. Three children (inc. myself) born in the covenant. Then my bio dad was excommunicated, which also broke the sealing he and my mom had. It did not change the fact that we were already born in the covenant; however a fourth sibling born after the ex -com was born OUT of the covenant. Bio mom and bio dad then divorced. My mom quickly remarried. They went through quite a process to prepare to be sealed, I think they both had their sealings broken (I could be wrong about the exact nature of this, but they did have to go through a process similar). Also, my bio dad's parent's rights were legally terminated and step dad legally adopted us first four. Then, my mom 8 mo pregnant with my fifth (half) sibling (she and subsequent would be, again, born in the covenant), her and (step) dad were sealed, and my fourth brother from the 1 st marriage was sealed on the altar to them.

This is all fine.

BUT, when my heart is turned to my Fathers, I ALWAYS feel after my biological heritage, from which I have been legally terminated and from whom whose my sealing status seems to have been transferred away to my step father. I have no interest whatsover in searching out my step dad's line, even though I love him and he was a good dad.

[LT04]

RE: Mrs S,

That number you gave me goes to a teletype processor. I found another number, on the family search web site. They refered me to another number, who refered me to another number, who..... you get the idea. Will try again when they come back to work tomorrow at 0930 local time. Thanks for the idea.

RE: xhenli,

Q: "First of all, how do you know that the child in the matter is born in the covenant?"

A: When the young woman first came to us with the story I had her go to the ward clerk and get a copy of her membership records to check. It said she was BIC. It also had the names of her parents and the pertaining temple work for them it all concurred what she said.

Q: "Also, I know for a fact that my mother has done genealogical research and submitted names to the temple (for which I did proxy initiatory) on lines tangential to her lines, and NOT her direct ancestors. These were people connect by shirt tails, but not by blood."

A: My director says there are two kinds of "shirt tail relatives" 1) your grandfather's brother. You can do his work b/c there is blood there. 2) your grandfather's brother's wife. Her work can't be done until one hundred years after her death. The one hundred year rule also goes for ancestors from the middle east, and a few other specific situations.

[MaidservantX]

well, as you say, I'm sure these people my mother did were dead more than a hundred years, so. :)

[LT04]

The church first put restrictions on who's work could be done in the (besides when they first started) in the '50s. The reason was a New York City ward took it upon them selves to do all the work for the victims of the holocaust. The repercutions as you could imagine were stagering.

I think a lot of work will have to be redone any way. A long time ago it was SOP (even if the husband was a worthy priesthood holder) to send for example your grandmother who lets say died 1930 to be sealed to Joseph Smith Jr. or other Pres.'s of the church or even members of the quorum of the seventy. Its going to take the entire millenium to fix things I think. (j/k maybe a few hundred years)

[LT04]

I HAVE AN ANSWER,

After jumping through many hoops, I got an answer. I don't know if I like it but it's an answer just the same.

I'm not going to repeat the question you will have to read the above discution and see for your self.

The answer I got from temple services in SLC was this young woman is sealed to her mothers first husband. Lets say her mother gets married to her third husband, her mother can get a temple cancellation. Following that she will be sealed to her third husband. (the young womans now step father). She will always be sealed to her mother (unless her mother gets excommunicated) due to this she will then be sealed as the daughter of who ever her mother is sealed to.

He's the indecisive part. This young woman now has the option to choose her mothers first, second or third husband as her genealogy link to her past. This is a new rule. The old rule was who ever she was sealed to as a daughter (blood or not) was her church recignized father.

Like I said before there were a lot of errors made in temple work over the years for example Hitler had his work done 3 times that I'm aware of. I don't like it that there isn't an easy or even a absolute answer. Leaving it up to the individual seems odd to me, but it came from temple services.

How do all y'all think about this should I look some where else for an answer?

[Guest MrsS]

How do all y'all think about this should I look some where else for an answer?

Why look elsewhere? Give the woman the answer and be done with it.

[LT04]

I did as soon as I found out.

I just find it bizzar that the church has such a open ended answer for a question. What I also find weird is that wasn't always the answer to that question. I always looked at the church as a constant. It caught me off guard when it threw me a curve ball.