Question for LDS "Do you Marry the dead?"

[Inishfree]

To be honest, I doubt it. I think Catholics in particular would be upset to hear of Blessed John Paul. Being married in a Mormon ritual.

I had no clue until very recently and reading these threads. What the LDS actually teaches. I suspect the same would be true for most Catholics.

 

[rock17]

I would agree it is unlikley but not out of the question.

 

[SalesianSDB]

the two men who where being executed on either side of Jesus. Jesus told one of them that he would be with Him in heaven that day, so I asked how he could be if He was not baptised or married. They responded with “we probably have already done those sacraments for him.”

Here’s my guess since I’m not a Mormon, but I believe that Mormons would say that the Apostles believed what the LDS Church teaches. So I would guess the best argument for this was that the man was baptized after his death by one of the Apostles or one of the followers of Jesus at that time, not necessarily in a modern day temple ceremony. Just a guess, but it seems the most logical.

o i was wondering how does marriage of the dead work? And is there no respect for those who led celebant lives like the nuns and priests?

I would assume that they only perform these marriages on people who were married to each other. Since George and Martha Washington were never sealed in the temple, they cannot be husband and wife in Heaven unless they were sealed in the temple. So I would assume that when they baptized them after death (which they did) they also performed the sealing ceremony for George and Martha. So it’s not like Martha Washington was sealed to Thomas Jefferson, but was sealed to her own husband, George Washington. But they wouldn’t seal someone like Grace Kelly to John Paul II (just an example) since they weren’t married when alive. Sorry if I offended by this example, but it’s just an example to make a point.

That’s my two cents from a non-LDS who likes researching LDS.

 

[rock17]

Thank you for your two cents, so what PeterJohn metioned earlier about unmarried women being sealed to married men is untrue or no longer a practice?

 

[SalesianSDB]

Thank you for your two cents, so what PeterJohn metioned earlier about unmarried women being sealed to married men is untrue or no longer a practice?

With that I’m unsure since women in the LDS faith are different than men. In the LDS faith a widower can be sealed to another woman after his wife dies. When he dies he will have two wives in heaven. However, a widow cannot be sealed to another man after her husband dies. When the Prophet Joseph Smith was killed, his wife Emma remarried, however she was not sealed to the man she was married to because she was already sealed to Joseph. While the modern LDS Church says they no longer practice polygamy, they do in heaven, just not on earth.

I wouldn’t know the answer. I haven’t really looked into baptism of the dead. I’ll do some research.

 

[rock17]

Was the man Emma married after Joseph died Mormon? Becuase if he was he would need a wife in heaven so that would mean that he would have to have more than one wife to be saved.

 

[ParkerD]

They may have changed that practice so to make it that unmarried people can not go to the highest level at all.
Your right it is absurd, I just wish I could find the doctrine about this because I want to know how the robber next to Jesus at the crucifixtion was able to get to “paradise” without these sacraments. Without a sealing or baptism in the temple.

Rock17,

I had previously noted that unmarried women can “go to the highest level” if they were desirous of being married but didn’t have a valid opportunity, and if they kept all of their covenants in life as best they could, and kept repenting and seeking the Spirit and serving others.

Unmarried men would have a somewhat tenuous case and it would depend on such things as their health and ultimately their innermost desires, and whether they chose to “be celibate” while understanding that the commandment given to Adam and Eve was indeed a commandment.

If one studies about the use of the word “paradise”, in the Jewish understanding that place is the waiting place for the resurrection, and is broadly called “Hades” with a part of it for the righteous who are waiting, and a part of it for the wicked who are waiting.

Jesus would have been telling the somewhat repentant thief (not yet fully repentant, nor fully cleansed through being sanctified by the Holy Spirit) that He would be “with him” in the waiting place for the resurrection, where no doubt the thief would have understood that he was going to have the chance to be taught the gospel and to repent of his sins.

Paradise is not heaven, and is not reflective of a place after the resurrection in the way that word was used in Luke 23:43. It is a “waiting place” and a “learning place”–where spirits dwell while awaiting their own resurrection. (See 1 Peter 3:19 about Jesus teaching the spirits.) See also 1 Peter 4:6. “According to men in the flesh” means just as “men in the flesh” need baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost, spirits “in the spirit” need this also so that they can be judged just as though they were living “in the flesh” since baptism is an earthly ordinance for a heavenly purpose.

 

[ParkerD]

Was the man Emma married after Joseph died Mormon? Becuase if he was he would need a wife in heaven so that would mean that he would have to have more than one wife to be saved.

Rock17,

He wasn’t a Latter-day Saint, and was evidently content with a time only marriage.

 

[SalesianSDB]

So I really wanted to know the answer, so I did one of my favorite things to do when I’m bored: Go to mormon.org and chat with the Mormon missionaries about Mormonism. You’d be amazed how much I know from these chat sessions. I asked them about sealing of the dead and this is what one of the missionaries said:

Me: I know the church does baptism for the dead, but do they also perform sealings for the dead?
**Missionary: **Yes. All of the ordinances that are performed for the living are also performed for the dead.
Me: Are the sealings just of people who were married in this life or does it matter if the person was married?
**Missionary: **For the people who were married in this life.
**Me: **so an unmarried woman cannot be sealed to a married man or any other man for that matter?
**Missionary: **I don’t believe so.
**Me: **Was it ever a practice to seal unmarried people?
**Missionary:**I don’t know.
Missionary: Sorry.

Just so you know, it said above the chat window: The purpose of mormon.org is to answer basic questions about the church and its beliefs and to provide opportunities to learn more.

Hope this helped

 

[rock17]

Rock17,

I had previously noted that unmarried women can “go to the highest level” if they were desirous of being married but didn’t have a valid opportunity, and if they kept all of their covenants in life as best they could, and kept repenting and seeking the Spirit and serving others.

Unmarried men would have a somewhat tenuous case and it would depend on such things as their health and ultimately their innermost desires, and whether they chose to “be celibate” while understanding that the commandment given to Adam and Eve was indeed a commandment.

If one studies about the use of the word “paradise”, in the Jewish understanding that place is the waiting place for the resurrection, and is broadly called “Hades” with a part of it for the righteous who are waiting, and a part of it for the wicked who are waiting.

Jesus would have been telling the somewhat repentant thief (not yet fully repentant, nor fully cleansed through being sanctified by the Holy Spirit) that He would be “with him” in the waiting place for the resurrection, where no doubt the thief would have understood that he was going to have the chance to be taught the gospel and to repent of his sins.

Paradise is not heaven, and is not reflective of a place after the resurrection in the way that word was used in Luke 23:43. It is a “waiting place” and a “learning place”–where spirits dwell while awaiting their own resurrection. (See 1 Peter 3:19 about Jesus teaching the spirits.) See also 1 Peter 4:6. “According to men in the flesh” means just as “men in the flesh” need baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost, spirits “in the spirit” need this also so that they can be judged just as though they were living “in the flesh” since baptism is an earthly ordinance for a heavenly purpose.

Thankyou for reclarifying about the women who wanted to be married and that teaching, it would seem than there is no need to seal a lady at all because if she wanted it here on earth she would either have been married or God will understand. In the case of men they need a sealed marriage for there to be a for sure entrance into the highest level of heaven.

Can you please give a quote from Jesus where he tells his apostles to perform batisms and marriages for those who have passed on?

Can Jesus perform these sacraments in the waiting level of the after life?

And was the marriage of Emma and her second husband performed by a minister of another denomination of Faith or was it more of a civil union?

 

[rock17]

So I really wanted to know the answer, so I did one of my favorite things to do when I’m bored: Go to mormon.org and chat with the Mormon missionaries about Mormonism. You’d be amazed how much I know from these chat sessions. I asked them about sealing of the dead and this is what one of the missionaries said:

Me: I know the church does baptism for the dead, but do they also perform sealings for the dead?
**Missionary: **Yes. All of the ordinances that are performed for the living are also performed for the dead.
Me: Are the sealings just of people who were married in this life or does it matter if the person was married?
**Missionary: **For the people who were married in this life.
**Me: **so an unmarried woman cannot be sealed to a married man or any other man for that matter?
**Missionary: **I don’t believe so.
**Me: **Was it ever a practice to seal unmarried people?
**Missionary:**I don’t know.
Missionary: Sorry.

Just so you know, it said above the chat window: The purpose of mormon.org is to answer basic questions about the church and its beliefs and to provide opportunities to learn more.

Hope this helped

yes it helped me see that they really don’t know that much about the more important stuff. like salvation

 

[ParkerD]

Thankyou for reclarifying …

1. Can you please give a quote from Jesus where he tells his apostles to perform baptisms and marriages for those who have passed on?
2. Can Jesus perform these sacraments in the waiting level of the after life?
3. And was the marriage of Emma and her second husband performed by a minister of another denomination of Faith or was it more of a civil union?

1. One would not expect to find this, because it wouldn’t have begun to happen until after Jesus had visited the spirit world during the time before His resurrection, and it wouldn’t have begun to happen until the apostles were settled in their callings and responsibilities, which took time and took an increase in faith on their part. Paul wrote about “baptism for the dead” in 1 Corinthians 15. It was also a most sacred and holy practice, so it would not have been talked or written about for the average member since there were so many new converts who would not be ready for even thinking about such things.
2. Jesus does not do for humankind what humankind can do for themselves. He delegates authority and the responsibility to use the authority righteously.
3. I assume it was a civil union, but don’t know. It was not an LDS temple marriage nor done by an LDS bishop for time only, definitely.

 

[rock17]

1. One would not expect to find this, because it wouldn’t have begun to happen until after Jesus had visited the spirit world during the time before His resurrection, and it wouldn’t have begun to happen until the apostles were settled in their callings and responsibilities, which took time and took an increase in faith on their part. Paul wrote about “baptism for the dead” in 1 Corinthians 15. It was also a most sacred and holy practice, so it would not have been talked or written about for the average member since there were so many new converts who would not be ready for even thinking about such things.
2. Jesus does not do for humankind what humankind can do for themselves. He delegates authority and the responsibility to use the authority righteously.
3. I assume it was a civil union, but don’t know. It was not an LDS temple marriage nor done by an LDS bishop for time only, definitely.

1.) I the baptism of the dead soul more sacred than that of the soul in an mortal body? I have seen nothing in the writings of the apostles (the Didache) about baptising or marrying someone who has died. And the new converts you talk about where people who believed in God the people who would rise through the ranks so is this when the so called Apostasy happened. When the apostles did not write about this practice so it was lost? Seems kind of careless to me.
2) okay if not Jesus what about anyone else in that spirit realm?
3) And I was just curious thank you.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I would assume that they only perform these marriages on people who were married to each other. LDS.

Not according to this article about Saint Damien of Molokai. Apparently he has been “sealed” to a woman named Marie even though he was a celibate priest.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Rock17,

I had previously noted that unmarried women can “go to the highest level” if they were desirous of being married but didn’t have a valid opportunity, and if they kept all of their covenants in life as best they could, and kept repenting and seeking the Spirit and serving others.

Unmarried men would have a somewhat tenuous case and it would depend on such things as their health and ultimately their innermost desires, and whether they chose to “be celibate” while understanding that the commandment given to Adam and Eve was indeed a commandment.

Why would unmarried men have a tenuous case, why could they not be in the same situation as the women in your previous paragraph? And why wouldn’t your comments about men and their health, desires and, choosing to be celibate apply to women also?

 

[ParkerD]

Why would unmarried men have a tenuous case, why could they not be in the same situation as the women in your previous paragraph? And why wouldn’t your comments about men and their health, desires and, choosing to be celibate apply to women also?

Z,

By “tenuous case” I meant it would depend on their individual choice-making process. I think men having the primary responsibility in most Biblically based societies to do the “asking” for a woman’s hand in marriage, places them in the position of having the larger role in making such a choice; and the larger role in seeking out a marriage with someone they fall in love with and feel themselves compatible with. The commandment given to Adam means they should recognize that they have a commandment from God to seek an help-meet, and should expend reasonable effort to find her. Then, if they really have done all they could, reasonably, and haven’t “found her”, then I suppose their case is “just like the women’s case.”

If a woman chooses to be celibate when also having been in a situation where she had a reasonable prospect for marriage to a worthy, able, loving, compatible, hard-working, respectful man who desired children and to be a worthy dad, then she would probably also have a “tenuous case” (unless she had a traumatic situation as a child, which would also be the case for a man which is why I mentioned “health”.)

 

[zaffiroborant]

Z,

By “tenuous case” I meant it would depend on their individual choice-making process. I think men having the primary responsibility in most Biblically based societies to do the “asking” for a woman’s hand in marriage, places them in the position of having the larger role in making such a choice; and the larger role in seeking out a marriage with someone they fall in love with and feel themselves compatible with.

He may do all the “asking” but if no one says yes what is he to do, I don’t see men being in a more “tenuous” position than women, both are “at the mercy” of the other when it comes to dating and marriage.

 

[Peter_John]

Thank you for your two cents, so what PeterJohn metioned earlier about unmarried women being sealed to married men is untrue or no longer a practice?

The LDS theological thinking goes like this:
Any ordinances necessary for whatever degree of Exaltation one might attain need to be performed in this life. When it comes to Eternal marriage in particular Mormons are quick to cite Jesus’ affirmation that “In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage.” Anyone who will have full status as an Eternally Married recipient of Celestial Glory (as compared to those unmarried who enjoy Celestial glory but lacking an Eternal spouse have no Eternal Increase) must have the ordinance of Eternal Marriage performed before the resurrection.

Women who die unmarried through no lack of effort of their own are promised that they will not lose any Eternal Blessings because of this. They will still have the opportunity to complete a Celestial marriage before the resurrection, but that marriage will have to be performed on Earth in mortality.

Culturally, men are held more responsible for failing to marry than are women – not necessarily doctrinally, but culturally. Around 1988 Ezra Taft Benson gave a discourse essentially slamming the returned missionaries who had been back for a long time and remained single. There is an LDS cultural bias that in general men stay single out of choice and women for lack of opportunity to marry --and I emphasize in general. It is the lack of opportunity that God will not penalize someone for.

Regarding the things I stated on performong marriages for the unmarried, I should have clarified that all those I read about years ago were for women who were already LDS when they died, they just had not been married. They were all sealed to general authorities. I apologize that I do not recall the specific sources on this.I had taken LDS seminary as a a teen, did well on the tests but rarely completed the assignments. This would have been among the things I read when I began taking my religion more seriously in the years before my mission.

It was 30 years ago (and we had no Internet then). My main resources were the stacks of books my grandfather (a 1959 convert to Mormonism) had received as a branch president from mission presidents Truman G. Madsen, Boyd K. Packer, and Paul H. Dunn, as well as those he had ordered. I had my father’s full set of Joseph Smith’s History of the Church (something rare to find in the East then), selections of Brigham Young’s Discourses, but not the whole Journal of Discourses (20 some-odd volumes as I recall), McConkie’s “Mormon Doctrine” (Bruce’s Bible) about 20 years of LDS periodicals, manuals, the Church News, and when I could afford it I ordered books myself.

This was somewhere amidst all of those. I apologize for not remembering where specifically to verify, and I hope I have been clear that this is the best I can remember, so I cannot qualify how authoritative the source would be.

With that clarification, I think ParkerD will confirm that the LDS doctrine is (or at least has been in the past) that all ordinances need performing to receive blessings associated with them, and that this must happen before the resurrection. Therefore, for anyone to receive the Celestial Kingdom with full priveleges and benefits (so to speak) the ordinance of marriage in the temple needs to be performed for them at some time before their resurrection whether they were actually married in this life or not.

In the concept of the Temple work to be done during the Millennium, additional resources will be available for sorting these out, as heaven and earth will be in closer proximity.

 

[rock17]

Thank you PeterJohn,
So I would like to bring up my question again is it possible for people to baptise eachother in the afterlife?
And is there any validity to Z’s post about St. Damien.
And I found no wirtings in the Didache (writings from the apostles) about batism for the dead)
and you metioned it was so sacred only few could know about it, is baptism for the dead more sacred than the living?
and if they did not write it down is this what started the so called apostasy?

And for all those who where wondering about Emma and her second husband I did a little research and found out who it is, Lewis C. Bidamon, he led an Illinios Milltia to help the lds in the battle of Nauvoo, Emma was the third wife out of four this man had in his lifetime. He was born Luthran but was a non-religious.

 

[Peter_John]

Thank you PeterJohn,
So I would like to bring up my question again is it possible for people to baptise eachother in the afterlife?
And is there any validity to Z’s post about St. Damien.
And I found no wirtings in the Didache (writings from the apostles) about batism for the dead)
and you metioned it was so sacred only few could know about it, is baptism for the dead more sacred than the living?
and if they did not write it down is this what started the so called apostasy?

And for all those who where wondering about Emma and her second husband I did a little research and found out who it is, Lewis C. Bidamon, he led an Illinios Milltia to help the lds in the battle of Nauvoo, Emma was the third wife out of four this man had in his lifetime. He was born Luthran but was a non-religious.

Baptism has to be performed in a mortal state before the resurrection either to one personally or on behalf of one if dead. In the spirit world they neother baptize nor perform baptisms, they can only accept what is done on their behalf in mortality.

Regarding St Damien, I have never heard the claim that he was married to someone by proxy in the temple before, and would not know how to validate or invalidate the claim. It is consistent with the perception I described of how things can be done and have been done in the past. St. Damien is significant as he was so revered in Hawaii, and Hawaii was such a hotbed of LDS activity at the same time, that many Hawaiian converts would have highly revered him (kind of like the way every Christian denomination likes to claim C. S. Lewis). One way to look at it is that such an act would be the LDS way of saying “We’re sure he gets the highest place in heaven too.” I learned about then Father Damien just a bit before my mission, and I was sure that Gid would not let his being Catholic keep him out of the Celestial Kingdom.

I’ll try to answer the last several all at once. LDS do not recognize the Didache as a valid teaching of the apostles anyway. their Biblical support (not basis-nothing in Mormonism is Biblically based except Joseph Smith’s impetus to pray resulting in his first vision) Biblical support is Paul’s argument supporting resurrection saying it is stupid to baptize for the dead if the dead rise not at all. There are nummerous other ways to explain it than as evidence of it being a valid Church practice, but my favorite is that we are all baptized in the name of someone “dead” when we take a confirmation name.