Sealing queries

[HaggisShuu]

I was born out of wedlock, and my parents separated and were thus never married. 
 

Both my parents went on to marry different partners. My mother is divorced. My father remains married. 
 

How does this translate to family history work? If I had a preference I would have my father sealed to his current wife and my mother, and they can all work it out in the eternities, but as my parents were never married is this even possible? What is the standard operating procedure for situations like this? 

[Just_A_Guy]

2 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

I was born out of wedlock, and my parents separated and were thus never married. 
 

Both my parents went on to marry different partners. My mother is divorced. My father remains married. 
 

How does this translate to family history work? If I had a preference I would have my father sealed to his current wife and my mother, and they can all work it out in the eternities, but as my parents were never married is this even possible? What is the standard operating procedure for situations like this? 

I believe your parents would need to be posthumously sealed to each other (deceased people can be sealed to all of their spouses) and then you would be sealed to your parents.  See CHI 38.4.2.2.

 

[laronius]

If they were not married in life I'm thinking you can't seal them in death without special permission from higher up. But that is just a guess. I remember a story of a pioneer couple who put off getting married because they wanted to be sealed in a temple at the same time. He died on the plains. I believe it was Pres Faust who upon hearing the story had them sealed. I don't know if she had already been sealed to someone else but there are general rules we follow with occasionally exceptions, all while recognizing that everything will be settled in the hear after to everyone's satisfaction. My recommendation is that if you feel moved upon to pursue it then pursue it. 

[Just_A_Guy]

4 hours ago, laronius said:

If they were not married in life I'm thinking you can't seal them in death without special permission from higher up. But that is just a guess. I remember a story of a pioneer couple who put off getting married because they wanted to be sealed in a temple at the same time. He died on the plains. I believe it was Pres Faust who upon hearing the story had them sealed. I don't know if she had already been sealed to someone else but there are general rules we follow with occasionally exceptions, all while recognizing that everything will be settled in the hear after to everyone's satisfaction. My recommendation is that if you feel moved upon to pursue it then pursue it. 

I believe you can seal dead unmarried couples if they had a child together.

[LDSGator]

29 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I believe you can seal dead unmarried couples if they had a child together.

Is there a way to keep someone from getting sealed? Ie-if someone had an abusive parent? 
 

(not speaking for me. My parents are great) 

[Just_A_Guy]

14 hours ago, LDSGator said:

Is there a way to keep someone from getting sealed? Ie-if someone had an abusive parent? 
 

(not speaking for me. My parents are great) 

Administratively, I don’t believe there’s a way to perpetually mark a record in a way that would make a posthumous sealing impossible.

Theologically, I think such a sealing would likely be void.

[LDSGator]

13 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Administratively, I don’t believe there’s a way to perpetually mark a record in a way that would make a posthumous sealing impossible.

Theologically, I think such a sealing would likely be void.

Thanks bud. It’s a question a lot of us have. Families can be together forever but for some people that’s a terrifying thought. Not being funny. 

[mirkwood]

I'm not sealed to either of my parents.  My dad is a non member.  They divorced and my mom was sealed to husband #2.  She remarried when I was 26.  I had no parent type relationship with him.  God can (will) sort it out in the next life.

Edited February 2 by mirkwood

[laronius]

4 hours ago, LDSGator said:

Thanks bud. It’s a question a lot of us have. Families can be together forever but for some people that’s a terrifying thought. Not being funny. 

One thing to remember is that a sealing only works with exalted relationships. If the relationship is not Celestial in nature the ordinance cannot be enforced. So no one has to worry about being "stuck" with someone forever.

[Carborendum]

On 2/1/2025 at 12:59 PM, HaggisShuu said:

I was born out of wedlock, and my parents separated and were thus never married. 

How does this translate to family history work? 

I hope JAG is right about his assertion.  It would make sense since they were married in the ancient Biblical sense.  They had voluntary sex with each other and produced a child.  Biblically, the consummation was the final part of the marriage ceremony.  Separation in this case would be considered divorce (anciently).

[JohnsonJones]

On 2/2/2025 at 12:10 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

Administratively, I don’t believe there’s a way to perpetually mark a record in a way that would make a posthumous sealing impossible.

Theologically, I think such a sealing would likely be void.

There isn't.

The church says some temple work is illegal to do (note, it is not), but that doesn't stop anyone from doing it for some reason. 

Relatives are supposed to be the domain of their children or grandchildren or other relatives until at least 110 years. 

Not for my relatives though.  All my relatives apparently had their temple work done (without me...the only member in my family). 

That does not mean my family was ignorant of what the Church does with sealings, and one of my relatives made it express that they did not want to be sealed to their first husband (who was abusive) and only sealed to their second husband.  Guess who was sealed to their first husband prior to any others? 

The way the church handles their sealing ordinances actually upset me more because I believe in the ordinances (or so I feel I am more upset about it).  One of the problems from having a family that is prominent from one area of the world is that many people feel your family is their personal property. 

It's a wierd state as well.  The Church seals women to multiple men these days, as well as men to multiple women (as they have always done since the early days).  It's not that much of order in appearance, but pure and unadulterated chaos on the web of who is sealed to who.

In that light, as long as both people are dead, if they had some sort of connection, they can be sealed together.  This means that if a child had a mother and father who were never married (and never even together, they just had that child together), after both mother and father are dead, they can be sealed together. 

[HaggisShuu]

39 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

There isn't.

The church says some temple work is illegal to do (note, it is not), but that doesn't stop anyone from doing it for some reason. 

Relatives are supposed to be the domain of their children or grandchildren or other relatives until at least 110 years. 

Not for my relatives though.  All my relatives apparently had their temple work done (without me...the only member in my family). 

That does not mean my family was ignorant of what the Church does with sealings, and one of my relatives made it express that they did not want to be sealed to their first husband (who was abusive) and only sealed to their second husband.  Guess who was sealed to their first husband prior to any others? 

The way the church handles their sealing ordinances actually upset me more because I believe in the ordinances (or so I feel I am more upset about it).  One of the problems from having a family that is prominent from one area of the world is that many people feel your family is their personal property. 

It's a wierd state as well.  The Church seals women to multiple men these days, as well as men to multiple women (as they have always done since the early days).  It's not that much of order in appearance, but pure and unadulterated chaos on the web of who is sealed to who.

In that light, as long as both people are dead, if they had some sort of connection, they can be sealed together.  This means that if a child had a mother and father who were never married (and never even together, they just had that child together), after both mother and father are dead, they can be sealed together. 

I have the exact issue, my entire family is from UK originating from Kent, with almost no deviation or outliers to this, clearly traceable to at least the 1300s. There are some who are still within the time frame of requiring approval from a closest living relative to have ordinances done. All closest living relatives live in the UK. But this hasn't stopped people from Utah completing ordinances. In my opinion if these people can't follow this most basic piece of policy, they shouldn't have a temple recommend. 

[Carborendum]

On 2/2/2025 at 1:10 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

Administratively, I don’t believe there’s a way to perpetually mark a record in a way that would make a posthumous sealing impossible.

Theologically, I think such a sealing would likely be void.

When I was the ward genealogy specialist, part of my training said that a person can put a note on their own record stating their desire for sealing or not-sealing to a parent in the divorce/unmarried/step-parent situation.

Whether that is observed or not is a different question.  Likely, the person will be sealed to a biological parent by rote.  But if someone sees the notation requesting otherwise, they could have that person also sealed to the parent of choice.  And in eternity, everything would be sorted out.

[zil2]

4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

The way the church handles their sealing ordinances actually upset me more because I believe in the ordinances (or so I feel I am more upset about it).

You do realize that proxy temple work is rather like me making an ice cream cone and holding it out to you and saying, "Would you like this ice cream cone?"  If you say, "No, thanks", then the only effect on you is that someone made an offer and you had to decide whether to accept it.  (And I think the only consequence to declining is that you don't get the ice cream cone.)

IMO, it's better to have a whole rack of ice cream cones and offer them to everyone that might possibly want one, and as soon as possible, than to not have enough ice cream cones to offer.

[laronius]

3 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

I have the exact issue, my entire family is from UK originating from Kent, with almost no deviation or outliers to this, clearly traceable to at least the 1300s. There are some who are still within the time frame of requiring approval from a closest living relative to have ordinances done. All closest living relatives live in the UK. But this hasn't stopped people from Utah completing ordinances. In my opinion if these people can't follow this most basic piece of policy, they shouldn't have a temple recommend. 

There is actually two parts to a sealing. The first part is the actual sealing ordinance. This is the only part we have control of when doing work for the dead. The other part is when this sealing ordinance is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise. I don't know if there's a specific term for it but essentially it's when God ratifies the sealing ordinance. This only takes place through faithful adherence of the covenants entered into. So if two people are sealed together, whether living or dead, and one or both do not live up to those covenants or simply no longer wants to be in that sealed relationship then God will not ratify it. Like @zil2 said, all we can do on our end is extend the offer. The rest is between them and God.

[zil2]

28 minutes ago, laronius said:

Like @zil2 said, all we can do on our end is extend the offer. The rest is between them and God.

I have read some things that suggest that in the spirit world, there are temples and temple ordinances going on.  So I think that there's a formality to the acceptance of ordinances done by proxy.  Nothing I've seen related to this is official from the Church, just one guy's experience in the spirit world and some other people's theories - can't even remember the sources at this point.  But it seems to me that this would be consistent with how the Lord works.  Note that even if this is the case (ordinances in the spirit world), their acceptance alone wouldn't be enough - the Holy Spirit of Promise is still required.

Edited February 4 by zil2

[LDSGator]

10 hours ago, Carborendum said:

hen I was the ward genealogy specialist, part of my training said that a person can put a note on their own record stating their desire for sealing or not-sealing to a parent in the divorce/unmarried/step-parent situation.

Whether that is observed or not is a different question.  Likely, the person will be sealed to a biological parent by rote.  But if someone sees the notation requesting otherwise, they could have that person also sealed to the parent of choice. 

That’s awesome. For those of us who are adopted (me!)-it’s a life saver. I have zero desire to be sealed to my bio family. 

[NeuroTypical]

On 2/2/2025 at 5:15 PM, laronius said:

One thing to remember is that a sealing only works with exalted relationships. If the relationship is not Celestial in nature the ordinance cannot be enforced. So no one has to worry about being "stuck" with someone forever.

Conversely, if people are unable to keep the commandment to love all and forgive all, they don't have to worry about whether their abuser is in the celestial kingdom or not, because they won't be there themselves.

It's an incredibly sobering thought, especially for folks who have tasted some of the worst things humans have to offer one another.  

Edited February 5 by NeuroTypical

[Vort]

On 2/2/2025 at 11:10 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

Administratively, I don’t believe there’s a way to perpetually mark a record in a way that would make a posthumous sealing impossible.

Theologically, I think such a sealing would likely be void.

I have an aunt, the wife of one of my father's brothers, who specified on her Family Search record that she was not to be sealed to her husband (my uncle). They are both dead now and, as far as I know, they are not sealed on the records of the Church.

[JohnsonJones]

On 2/4/2025 at 8:18 AM, zil2 said:

I have read some things that suggest that in the spirit world, there are temples and temple ordinances going on.  So I think that there's a formality to the acceptance of ordinances done by proxy.  Nothing I've seen related to this is official from the Church, just one guy's experience in the spirit world and some other people's theories - can't even remember the sources at this point.  But it seems to me that this would be consistent with how the Lord works.  Note that even if this is the case (ordinances in the spirit world), their acceptance alone wouldn't be enough - the Holy Spirit of Promise is still required.

I'd be interested in reading the guy's experience that you noted above.  Thank you.

[zil2]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'd be interested in reading the guy's experience that you noted above.  Thank you.

There's a PDF here: https://emp.byui.edu/ANDERSONKC/halesp.pdf

[Carborendum]

12 hours ago, zil2 said:

There's a PDF here: https://emp.byui.edu/ANDERSONKC/halesp.pdf

"I must of necessity be brief."

...Then proceeds to speak enough to fill 4 pages.

[zil2]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

"I must of necessity be brief."

...Then proceeds to speak enough to fill 4 pages.

Brief had a different meaning before the interwebs.