Question for LDS "Do you Marry the dead?"

[rock17]

hey ParkerD
If you could, where does it say that a man or women must be married to reach full glory? And would not Jesus have to be married? Do you believe He was?
And if you could speak on twopekinguys comment i would appreciate it.

 

[sojo]

Let me make sure I understand what you are saying: A person would only be sealed to another person if “a person who would have married based on their desires in life”.

If that is in fact the case/procedure, can you explain why St. Damien (who worked with lepors in Hawaii), who was a celibate priest (choice obviously made), was sealed to some unknown woman after his death?

Two unmarried people being married after death is not the norm, from what I understand. There might be an exception in the case of celibates.

The confusion for some is that the Mormons have two forms or levels of marriage. The first is just a regular marriage, done civilly or in a park or religious center or hotel or such. That is a marriage “till death do us part” like the rest of us have. But the higher level of marriage is a temple marriage which is a sealed marriage in the temple (sorry if I’m not getting the words right). THAT kind of marriage extends after death.

So if a couple was married in life, but it wasn’t a temple marriage, LDS belief is that they can seal that marriage after death.

They also believe they can baptize after death, which gets them into a lot of hot water as they don’t always bother to get permission from families. There was much furor when it was discovered that thousands of Jews, holocaust victims included, were being baptized as Mormons after their death. The LDS church promised to stop the practice, but then there was some scandal that it was still going on?? Not sure if that was true or not.

But if some Mormon wants to submit the name of a distant relative, say a Catholic priest or bishop, and ask they be married after death to some woman, maybe a 4th cousin in the same family, also dead… well, that’s pretty creepy. A new one on me, for sure.

I heard of one temple that was having trouble recruiting enough people to do the proxy baptisms. The local teens reportedly were getting tired of giving up their day to get dunked over and over and over and over, and the whole ritual sort of lost its spiritual gleam.

Temple sealings are very interesting, and there’s a lot of information on the web now to research. When I was a kid, it was all very hush-hush, secret, and of course it made it much more titillating.

 

[ParkerD]

Let me make sure I understand what you are saying: A person would only be sealed to another person if “a person who would have married based on their desires in life”.

If that is in fact the case/procedure, can you explain why St. Damien (who worked with lepors in Hawaii), who was a celibate priest (choice obviously made), was sealed to some unknown woman after his death?

Hi, Twopekinguys,

I know what researchers who are regular members are supposed to do before submitting for temple work to be done–which includes having documented source data that the person is able to be separately identified through either a birth record or some other record, and their marriage or having had children able to be documented in some reliably obtained record of that such as a census record or a marriage record, and a relationship to the deceased by the person submitting the name.

There can, of course, be two people born at about the same time in the same country and have the same given name or a very similar given name–so that could be this particular instance, or it could be someone’s mistake in their research–but no temple work will override the person’s free will choice, of course–so it basically means the time of several people was wasted if that was done, since it will mean absolutely nothing to anyone in the spirit world and the spirits there have more important things to do than worry about whether their name was submitted with incorrect and meaningless family connections.

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker - Finally a little sunshine!

It seems by your post that you are saying that all people will be married during the Millennium who did not get the opportunity to do so in their lives, correct?

1. Is it possible that some people never wanted to be married and that they will not choose that during the Millennium?
2. Is marriage necessary for all?

Hi, Lax16,

1. Not “all people”. I meant that the way will be opened up during the Millennium for communication about marriage sealings needing to be done for those who, through no fault of their own such as if they died young or had the righteous desire for marriage but it didn’t happen in their life, had no marriage in this life but express the desire for an eternal marriage while they are in the spirit world where they will have been “waiting” for all those years.
2. So, yes to question #2, absolutely.
3. I think the word “necessary” is the wrong word. We are here in this life making choices about “what we want” and “what we want to do”.

Some people don’t want marriage, so of course they shouldn’t feel obligated to marry if they don’t want that. As the Savior taught, a covenant marriage such as Adam and Eve had means a huge amount of responsibility and commitment, which some people don’t choose so it means they don’t want children either in this life or in the next life. They can serve God best by living by their inner heart’s desire and their own free will choice, and bringing their personal will into a relationship with God that it is inspired by the Holy Spirit in their personal choices.

After they have that relationship, then the Holy Spirit will guide them in their personal choices if they are meek and submissive and humble. They will be able to have all the “service joy” in their resurrection that they experienced in this life, accompanied by eternal glory–so it will be what they wanted and what they chose.

 

[ParkerD]

hey ParkerD

1. If you could, where does it say that a man or women must be married to reach full glory?
2. And would not Jesus have to be married?
3. Do you believe He was?
4. And if you could speak on twopekinguys comment i would appreciate it.

Hi, Rock17,

1. Genesis 1:28 and 2:24.
2. He knew He was going to die at an age when most men would be fathers and husbands, so I think it would make complete sense that He would not have married–nor did He need marriage in order to “progress” since He was already perfect and perfectly loving with perfect understanding and compassion.

He would not have the same standards as for mortal people, since we are here to “progress” toward “be ye therefore perfect”.

1. No, I honestly don’t. I think Mary and Martha (the sisters of Lazarus) had a great devotion to Him and a unique understanding about what He was teaching about the resurrection when He taught them privately, and although Mary Magdalene was the first to see Him after His resurrection, John 20:11-18 doesn’t show any hint at all that they were married.

So none of those three, and they are the ones for whom there is sometimes speculation about anyone being married to Him.

1. (see earlier post)

Wishing a peaceful and happy day to all.

 

[Inishfree]

Two unmarried people being married after death is not the norm, from what I understand. There might be an exception in the case of celibates.

The confusion for some is that the Mormons have two forms or levels of marriage. The first is just a regular marriage, done civilly or in a park or religious center or hotel or such. That is a marriage “till death do us part” like the rest of us have. But the higher level of marriage is a temple marriage which is a sealed marriage in the temple (sorry if I’m not getting the words right). THAT kind of marriage extends after death.

So if a couple was married in life, but it wasn’t a temple marriage, LDS belief is that they can seal that marriage after death.

They also believe they can baptize after death, which gets them into a lot of hot water as they don’t always bother to get permission from families. There was much furor when it was discovered that thousands of Jews, holocaust victims included, were being baptized as Mormons after their death. The LDS church promised to stop the practice, but then there was some scandal that it was still going on?? Not sure if that was true or not.

But if some Mormon wants to submit the name of a distant relative, say a Catholic priest or bishop, and ask they be married after death to some woman, maybe a 4th cousin in the same family, also dead… well, that’s pretty creepy. A new one on me, for sure.

I heard of one temple that was having trouble recruiting enough people to do the proxy baptisms. The local teens reportedly were getting tired of giving up their day to get dunked over and over and over and over, and the whole ritual sort of lost its spiritual gleam.

Temple sealings are very interesting, and there’s a lot of information on the web now to research. When I was a kid, it was all very hush-hush, secret, and of course it made it much more titillating.

I have read about this too, in regards to the Jewish people. I don’t blame them for being upset. I have also read that Jewish people who are still alive were baptised Mormon by proxy.

My question is. What gives the LDS church the right to do so? If a Jewish person would read the research I have done with my ancestors. They would respect it. They wouldn’t change any of it.

It is possible that one of my ancestral names may be the decendants of an early Irish Cathloic saint. If this is true. No one has the right to take that away from me or my family.

My Irish ancestry goes back to the time of Saint Patrick and even before.

 

[twopekinguys]

Hi, Twopekinguys,

I know what researchers who are regular members are supposed to do before submitting for temple work to be done–which includes having documented source data that the person is able to be separately identified through either a birth record or some other record, and their marriage or having had children able to be documented in some reliably obtained record of that such as a census record or a marriage record, and a relationship to the deceased by the person submitting the name.

There can, of course, be two people born at about the same time in the same country and have the same given name or a very similar given name–so that could be this particular instance, or it could be someone’s mistake in their research–but no temple work will override the person’s free will choice, of course–so it basically means the time of several people was wasted if that was done, since it will mean absolutely nothing to anyone in the spirit world and the spirits there have more important things to do than worry about whether their name was submitted with incorrect and meaningless family connections.

Obviously, anyone can make a mistake, but it is also quite evident in St. Daminen’s case, this was not one of those situations.

Just like doing 'temple" work for Pres. Obama’s mother, and countless others, where there is no connection to the deceased.

The sad thing about this is that down the road, someone is going to do family research, and it is going to *appear *that their legitimate relative was mormon, when in fact it is not, and was not the case.

 

[lax16]

Obviously, anyone can make a mistake, but it is also quite evident in St. Daminen’s case, this was not one of those situations.

Just like doing 'temple" work for Pres. Obama’s mother, and countless others, where there is no connection to the deceased.

The sad thing about this is that down the road, someone is going to do family research, and it is going to *appear *that their legitimate relative was mormon, when in fact it is not, and was not the case.

Parker - twopekinguys makes an interesting point.

How does one determine if someone was a mormon by choice vs by proxy?
Does the paperwork state this clearly?

Also, are Mormons who are baptized after they are dead and who were not Mormon while living, are they added to the membership rolls?

 

[Inishfree]

Hi, Twopekinguys,

I know what researchers who are regular members are supposed to do before submitting for temple work to be done–which includes having documented source data that the person is able to be separately identified through either a birth record or some other record, and their marriage or having had children able to be documented in some reliably obtained record of that such as a census record or a marriage record, and a relationship to the deceased by the person submitting the name.

There can, of course, be two people born at about the same time in the same country and have the same given name or a very similar given name–so that could be this particular instance, or it could be someone’s mistake in their research–but no temple work will override the person’s free will choice, of course–so it basically means the time of several people was wasted if that was done, since it will mean absolutely nothing to anyone in the spirit world and the spirits there have more important things to do than worry about whether their name was submitted with incorrect and meaningless family connections.

This should mean that deceased ancestors, dead relatives of even a Mormon convert should not be listed. If the LDS is so great at researching. Then why are people who were Jewish or Christian listed? I would think if somehow they are accessing church records. Names like the United Methodist Church and Sacred Heart of Mary. Would be a clear indication that these people were not Mormons.

I already know. I have been harping on this. Because, it is an important issue for me. I want my ancestors to be known for who they were and not what someone else decided they should be. It’s like stealing one’s identity.

 

[ParkerD]

Parker - twopekinguys makes an interesting point.

How does one determine if someone was a mormon by choice vs by proxy?
Does the paperwork state this clearly?

(3) Also, are Mormons who are baptized after they are dead and who were not Mormon while living, are they added to the membership rolls?

Lax16,

I had been going to answer his post, but I’ll answer here for both of you:

A Latter-day Saint doing family history research and submitting names for temple work, understands the life span of the person whose name they submit, and has a simple link to know the date of a temple ordinance done in their behalf, such as:

life span, 1820-1882
Date of baptism, 12 December 1998.

So it’s pretty simple and obvious about whether a person was a Latter-day Saint member during their life. (Only a click away).

Names can now be submitted online, paperless, though the research may have required looking at a book or a family Bible or an online census record or etc.

(3) (Heavens,) no. It is a completely different thing, and it is not about “numbers”–it is about individual people, distant relatives usually, and just means they have an opportunity in the spirit world that they otherwise would be waiting around for if they were “ready”. (“Ready” means spiritually desiring it through their free will choice.)

 

[lax16]

Lax16,

I had been going to answer his post, but I’ll answer here for both of you:

A Latter-day Saint doing family history research and submitting names for temple work, understands the life span of the person whose name they submit, and has a simple link to know the date of a temple ordinance done in their behalf, such as:

life span, 1820-1882
Date of baptism, 12 December 1998.

So it’s pretty simple and obvious about whether a person was a Latter-day Saint member during their life. (Only a click away).

Names can now be submitted online, paperless, though the research may have required looking at a book or a family Bible or an online census record or etc.

(3) (Heavens,) no. It is a completely different thing, and it is not about “numbers”–it is about individual people, distant relatives usually, and just means they have an opportunity in the spirit world that they otherwise would be waiting around for if they were “ready”. (“Ready” means spiritually desiring it through their free will choice.)

Hi Parker - Our LDS friend baptized my Jewish father-in-law and told us about it later.

Obviously, they are not related.

Would our friend have needed to submit my father-in-law’s personal data - which is now easily accessed as public data - to baptize him?

Where are my father-in-laws baptism records stored? Who has access to them?

 

[Inishfree]

Lax, was this your father-in-law’s choice?

 

[lax16]

Lax, was this your father-in-law’s choice?

Heavens no!!

He was Jewish and died with a Rabbi visiting him until his death.

Actually, if my in-laws knew, they would not be happy. Jewish people really don’t like religion forced upon anyone. They are very clear on that. They say it is like when Hitler forced things upon people and that we should let people choose how they want to live.

I know that if he were to have picked another religion while alive, it would have probably have been Catholic. He had many good experiences with Catholics during his lifetime. He never would have believed Mormonism and their view of God being a man. It is shocking, really.

 

[Esdra]

Temple sealings are very interesting, and there’s a lot of information on the web now to research. When I was a kid, it was all very hush-hush, secret, and of course it made it much more titillating.

But from the Church founders Joseph Smith Jr. and Co. it was intended to be secret.
Why then do we know all of sudden so much about it?
We know how the sealing of marriages to eternity work as well as baptism for the dead. What other ceremonies are done in the LDS temples?
Wouldn’t Joseph Smith Jr. and the other “Church Fathers” roll over in their graves if they knew that the temple ceremonies are no longer secret?

 

[Inishfree]

Heavens no!!

He was Jewish and died with a Rabbi visiting him until his death.

Actually, if my in-laws knew, they would not be happy. Jewish people really don’t like religion forced upon anyone. They are very clear on that. They say it is like when Hitler forced things upon people and that we should let people choose how they want to live.

I know that if he were to have picked another religion while alive, it would have probably have been Catholic. He had many good experiences with Catholics during his lifetime. He never would have believed Mormonism and their view of God being a man. It is shocking, really.

I understand how your in-laws feel and they are absolutely correct. Jewish people died for their faith.

There was a time when it was illegal to be Catholic in Ireland. Imagine that! Thankfully, it was rarely enforced.

I would like to know how to go about getting my grandparents names off the Mormon site. The person who put them on there is in a nursing home and may suffer from early dementia. At the time of becomming Mormon. She was suffering with a mental illness. Untreated Bipolar depression and severe mood swings. I feel under those circumstances the Catholic nor Protestant church would have confirmed her. Telling her to get treated for her health issues, then make the choice. If that was what she still wished for.

 

[rock17]

Hi, Rock17,

1. Genesis 1:28 and 2:24.
2. He knew He was going to die at an age when most men would be fathers and husbands, so I think it would make complete sense that He would not have married–nor did He need marriage in order to “progress” since He was already perfect and perfectly loving with perfect understanding and compassion.

He would not have the same standards as for mortal people, since we are here to “progress” toward “be ye therefore perfect”.

1. No, I honestly don’t. I think Mary and Martha (the sisters of Lazarus) had a great devotion to Him and a unique understanding about what He was teaching about the resurrection when He taught them privately, and although Mary Magdalene was the first to see Him after His resurrection, John 20:11-18 doesn’t show any hint at all that they were married.

So none of those three, and they are the ones for whom there is sometimes speculation about anyone being married to Him.

1. (see earlier post)

Wishing a peaceful and happy day to all.

1. God does make mention of what is now known as marriage but says nothing about it being needed for salvation. If it was needed it would almost seem it would be one of the Ten Commandments.
2. We must strive to be perfect and to be perfect we must be married and Jesus was perfect so, I am adding 2 and 2 and getting 4 here it seems like Jesus would have to be married to someone.

 

[rock17]

And also could you please say if it is possible for someone to be baptised by reconmendation from a friend and not family.

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker - Our LDS friend baptized my Jewish father-in-law and told us about it later.

Obviously, they are not related.

Would our friend have needed to submit my father-in-law’s personal data - which is now easily accessed as public data - to baptize him?

Where are my father-in-laws baptism records stored? Who has access to them?

Lax16,

This means the person who submitted that temple work was not complying with the standards that they agreed to comply with when they did their submission. It should not have been done, period, unless close family members were specifically asked for permission, verbally at least. If immediate family members are living, then I think the record is stored in a computer database but is not accessible if there are known living family members.

 

[lax16]

Lax16,

This means the person who submitted that temple work was not complying with the standards that they agreed to comply with when they did their submission. It should not have been done, period, unless close family members were specifically asked for permission, verbally at least. If immediate family members are living, then I think the record is stored in a computer database but is not accessible if there are known living family members.

Hi Parker - I wonder if our friend asked if it would be okay. I will find out.

Won’t there always be known living family members as long as there are grandchildren, great grandchildren etc? So it stays in the database unaccessible forever for what reason?

 

[zaffiroborant]

Lax16,

This means the person who submitted that temple work was not complying with the standards that they agreed to comply with when they did their submission. It should not have been done, period, unless close family members were specifically asked for permission, verbally at least. If immediate family members are living, then I think the record is stored in a computer database but is not accessible if there are known living family members.

What safe guards are in place to insure that members follow these standards? And what consequences do LDS members face if they do not comply with standards?
If there are no safeguards or consequences for violators your “standards” are at best nothing more than hot air from your church and at worst a lie.

Do you understand why someone might find this offensive, I’m just curious because I have never seen an LDS member able to understand and empathize with someone who finds this offensive, the same is true for temple weddings. In both these cases I have never seen at LDS member exhibit empathy or understanding of a non-LDS persons viewpoint. With weddings in particular the discussion breaks down rather quickly into either mocking and derision concerning the reception, it’s cost and so on. Or the same sort of derision aimed at the weddings ceremony, I can’t tell you how many LDS have said non-LDS wedding ceremonies are meaningless, nothing more than a show for the bride and her mother.