Question for LDS "Do you Marry the dead?"

  • Thread starter Thread starter rock17
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D&C is Doctrines and Covenants one of four of the LDS “scriptures” the others are the Bible, the BoM, and the Pearl of Great price. The introduction to D&C 132 that Rebecca referred to reads as follows:

It seems that in spite of Rmcmullan’s protestations that LDS.org does see “celestial marriage” as the new and everlasting covenant.
Mormonism also views itself as this covenant. But certainly, it is never taught to a Mormon that Jesus Christ is THE New and Everlasting Covenant…a Covenant that never fades, ends, withdraws or is replaced.

It is Jesus Christ Who we adhere to, the Reason (logos), of our Faith.

I never get this sense from Mormons, it always seems secondary, and I never thought of Jesus as central to what I was taught as a Mormon. It was Joseph Smith, and temple worthiness (so one could be married/sealed in a temple), that were central.
 
For those of you who might be confused by some of the comments on this thread, any claims that Mormons view marriage as the new and everlasting covenant can only be explained as the result of a profound misunderstanding of Mormon beliefs. Marriage is part of it yes, but not the New and Evelasting Covenant. In that sense, Mormons are very traditional.

In general, Mormons are pretty big on covenants. There are a lot of them and they’re all between Man and God. It’s a big topic to explain but I expect that the word usage between our two faiths is very different.
 
**
rmcmullan;8010870**:
For those of you who might be confused by some of the comments on this thread, any claims that Mormons view marriage as the new and everlasting covenant can only be explained as the result of a profound misunderstanding of Mormon beliefs. Marriage is part of it yes, but not the
** New and Evelasting Covenant. In that sense, Mormons are very traditional.

In general, Mormons are pretty big on covenants. There are a lot of them and they’re all between Man and God. It’s a big topic to explain but I expect that the word usage between our two faiths is very different**.**

Let’s be truly honest here. Your belief system is not like anything that is Traditional Christianity. It parts with who is God. Same words different meanings. But the meanings of the very words were changed by the Mormons not the Christians. It is important to know who changed the meaning of such words. The most important word to look at would be the word God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Together all one word. “God”

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it………… John

Jesus is the light, as created beings it is His light that gives us life, the light (love) that sustains us. He is like the Sun that gives life to the world. We are like the moon that does not have any light on our own. All we can do is reflect His light on to others such as yourself.

We are nothing without Jesus.

In Christ
Rich
 
Our covenant is with Jesus Christ…

Our marriage is a sacrament in Christ. Our Catholic marriages are one with Christ.

From what I have been reading these years about Mormonism is that it is about sealing, covenants, and we are apostates. I don’t buy that side comment that there have been a few of us that are true Christians.

That is the same spin we hear from other anti-religionists.
 
That’s true Kathleen. I had a civil marriage, then it was blessed by the Catholic Church. Even at the court house. I held a rosary in my hand. I wanted Jesus there.

I was free to marry, my husband to be had to apply for an annulment. From his first marriage. He was legally divorced for five years. When, I met him and the annulment didn’t take too long. Because of our situation.

I’ll put this in a delicate way. We needed to get married a little sooner, than we had planned.

We are still happily married to this day. 28 years next month and going strong! Our son is twenty seven and has been married for almost a year.
 
Good for you, Inish, and much blessings to you, your husband and family!
 
KathleenGee, you’re right: in Catholicism, marriage is a sacrament and in Mormonism a covenant. The concepts are very different.

Feel free to correct me, I only have a hazy understanding, but according to Wikipedia, all sacraments are “efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us.” And that seems to go along with what others have been saying.

In Mormonism it’s a promise a man and woman make to each other that God approves of and honors.

Is this right so far?
 
Well, you have to go back and understand what a sacrament is…and then you have to go back and understand Who Jesus Christ is…

Christology…I would highly recommend all Mormons to get a diocesan approved program and study Catholic Christology. My studies were under the jurisdiction of then Archbishop Levada, and the priest he selected studied in Rome…the priest was there to correct any errors among lay professional ministers…I was caring for my family and father then…spent 5.5 years parttime…

We essentially studied Vatican II, the Universal Catechism, encyclicals, Canon Law, LIturgy direct from the Church documents themselves, no in-between interpreter. The other issue that comes up all the time is hierarchy of truths.

Non-Catholics trip up when they quote a prelate or an event from a Protestant or anti-Catholic filter…I guess you could say it happens within Mormonism.

But the whole point is context…and Catholics see Revelation as coming from a historical, documented peoples…the Jews…and continues beyond Pentecost, now the new dimension – the Church.

Jesus Christ is concrete, incorporated with us in the sacrament. But it doesn’t mean much if you do not understand Christ as He has been revealed down through the centuries.

The problem with Mormonism is that it is based on uncontested, unchallenged claims by one man. Martin Luther began the undoing of Christianity. When both sides employed the military, that was the final separation. Luther’s main point was indulgences, but in spite of his own highly self-indulgent penitential life lived to the extreme, and not reflecting the balance the Holy Spirit gives, he, with all his education, ignored the other side of indulgences…Church sanctioned means to do penance for one’s sins…as Luke said of Christ, ‘Do penance lest ye likewise shall perish.’ The other biggie is that Luther no longer believed that the deposit of apostolic life was handed down by the Apostles…this is a great, great dismissal of the Holy Spirit. Again, I do not see Luther, in spite of his intent to correct abuses, was being led by the Holy Spirit…

And this is what I see devoid in Joseph Smith.

The Holy Spirit works to bring understanding and unity among Christians. The Sacraments are concrete and non-arbitrary signs that are Jesus Christ actively present to us in the world. Sacramental marriage is the union of man and wife in Jesus Christ Himself. You think, so what…well you have to study Christ and all that He can provide for marriage, and the source of union in the next life…as well as with all our loved ones…and new friends!
 
But the concept of a sacrament is a Catholic thing. It does not appear in the Bible. To Mormons, the sacrament is the bread and water/wine we take every Sunday. Whereas covenants are prominent. The Old Testament was the covenant with Abrahahm. The new Testament was the gospel.

Marriage is also a covenant and through the sealing power the Lord has given to His Priesthood, the New and Everlasting covenant is extended to not just those humble before the Lord, but also their families.
 
But the concept of a sacrament is a Catholic thing. It does not appear in the Bible. To Mormons, the sacrament is the bread and water/wine we take every Sunday. Whereas covenants are prominent. The Old Testament was the covenant with Abrahahm. The new Testament was the gospel.

Marriage is also a covenant and through the sealing power the Lord has given to His Priesthood, the New and Everlasting covenant is extended to not just those humble before the Lord, but also their families.
That is not entirely correct. What Catholics call “Sacraments” Mormons call “Ordinances”.General ordinances (sacraments) include baptism, confirmation, “the sacrament”, blessings of the sick,dedication of home, dedication of graves, traditional marriage (marriage for time only according to secular law) and Temple ordinances (cleansing, endowment, Eternal marriage, and ordinances performed by proxy for the dead).

They claim only a few proscribed prayers (baptism, sacrament, temple ordinances) but their Doctrine and Covenants specifically designates the hymnal (the creation of which it affirms as divine mandate) as a prayer book. The ways LDS authorities encourage members to use hymns and scriptural vereses in their lives equates to the way we use prayer books and the rosary.

If these seem to have no Biblical basis, it doesn’t matter. LDS doctrine (dogma), teachings, and apologetics employs the Bible selectively, emphasizing what it needs, and disregarding what disagrees with it as an error or intentional corruption in translation. That is why I treat the Book of Mormon the same way. It is easier to prove Catholicism than contemporary Mormonism by the contents of the Book of Mormon.
 
KathleenGee, you’re right: in Catholicism, marriage is a sacrament and in Mormonism a covenant. The concepts are very different.

Feel free to correct me, I only have a hazy understanding, but according to Wikipedia, all sacraments are “efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us.” And that seems to go along with what others have been saying.

In Mormonism it’s a promise a man and woman make to each other that God approves of and honors.

Is this right so far?
That is funny. When did they stop teaching that Temple marriage was an ordinance?

Marriage is as much a covenanat in Catholicism as it is in Mormonism. When Catholics get married it is not the priest “marrying” them. They marry each other, and the priest stands witness to this covenant between them before the congregation, literally in the presence of God… Just as LDS Eternal marriages are supposed to happen in the Temple, Catholic marriages are suppose to be in the church itself. This is because we believe that the church is literally the House of the Lord – his very presence in the Eucharistic Body of Christ is there, in every Catholic church.

Doesn’t sound that different a perception than LDS Temple marriage, does it? The main difference is that we do not believe in Eternal marriage, but Eternal communion. We do not worry if outsiders will mock what we consider sacred, or feel that they can damage the inherent sanctity of the literal presence of God in the Eucharist. Our God encourages everyone to come into his presence as they are. Your perceive a God who shuts them out of his presence until worthy. We perceive none as worthy, and cannot comprehend how one can be made worthy of the Promises of Christ outside of God’s presence.
 
For those of you who might be confused by some of the comments on this thread, any claims that Mormons view marriage as the new and everlasting covenant can only be explained as the result of a profound misunderstanding of Mormon beliefs. Marriage is part of it yes, but not the New and Evelasting Covenant. In that sense, Mormons are very traditional.

In general, Mormons are pretty big on covenants. There are a lot of them and they’re all between Man and God. It’s a big topic to explain but I expect that the word usage between our two faiths is very different.
That is correct. Though some LDS often refer to “The New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage” marriage itself is not the New and Everlasting Covenant, that is considered the fulness of the restored gospel (restored in LDS perspective).

Noticing your other posts I want to emphasize, from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (a better source than Wikipedia)::
1621 In the Latin Rite the celebration of marriage between two Catholic faithful normally takes place during Holy Mass, because of the connection of all the sacraments with the Paschal mystery of Christ.120 In the Eucharist the memorial of the New Covenant is realized, the New Covenant in which Christ has united himself for ever to the Church, his beloved bride for whom he gave himself up.121 It is therefore fitting that the spouses should seal their consent to give themselves to each other through the offering of their own lives by uniting it to the offering of Christ for his Church made present in the Eucharistic sacrifice, and by receiving the Eucharist so that, communicating in the same Body and the same Blood of Christ, they may form but “one body” in Christ.122 usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2chpt3art7.shtml
It is both a sacrament and a covenant, and the officiants in the sacrament are the couple themselves. It really is a vocation, like becoming a deacon or a priest, but it is so significant and sacred that it has recognition of its own aside from Holy Orders.
 
Catholic marriage not in the Bible???

In contradiction to the great Apostasy that Christianity was apostate until America’s Mormonism, the Gospels show Christ’s first miracle at the wedding at Cana…bringing in new wine…precursor to what He will become for us in --the new life Blood through the Eucharist…the Groom and Bridegroom…Christ Himself is defining the new Covenant first as marriage.

And the Epistles and Revelations laying down the foundation of the Church…the new dimension of God. Then there is the imagery of the Church as the Bride of Christ.

There are remains of ancient Christians, one in particular stands out to me…a young couple wearing their wedding rings with the sign of a fish on them, the husband embracing his wife, and she embracing their small child, all killed in an earthquake.

Ancient Masses involved taking oaths at the end to not commit adultery, monogamous marriages, to not lie or steal. It is in this ambient, that vows were made in Christ and before the community, the sacred coming from Christ Himself.

In Catholic marriages, the man and woman marry each other in Christ, with the priest as witness at a Nuptial Mass. The whole value and meaning of giving of self to the other is all from Christ in their love.

So instead of sealing, the Catholic couple are directly bound to God Himself.

Again, Who is Christ? That is my question to Mormons? Some how you are making Him far less than He really is. You do not experience the reality and fullness of Christ as Catholics do.
 
Peter John, at first I was impressed by your description of Catholic marriage as Eternal Communion instead of Eternal Marriage. But then I asked myself what does Eternal Communion mean? Does it mean we can hang out with our family just like we can everyone else in the afterlife? In all fairness, I’m asking hypothetical questions that I can’t answer any better.

Also, KathleenGee, I meant the word Sacrament is not in the Bible. Catholic marriage or at least marriage in general started with Adam & Eve I presume.

So let me ask you all this. Abraham covenanted with the Lord–he promised to follow Him and the Lord promised to bless him through his family. In Genesis, Jacob blesses his twelves sons and the covenant that the Lord made with Abraham he made with Israel. So what was the point of the covenant? Why didn’t they just enjoy communion?
 
Peter John, at first I was impressed by your description of Catholic marriage as Eternal Communion instead of Eternal Marriage. But then I asked myself what does Eternal Communion mean? Does it mean we can hang out with our family just like we can everyone else in the afterlife? In all fairness, I’m asking hypothetical questions that I can’t answer any better.
It means the nature of this existence is so different from Heaven that we can only understand it by analogy. We ultimately have no way of comprehending it, and you do not know it, but that is what you believe too.

You believe that as man now is God once was, as God now is man may become. While Joseph Smith taught all of this as a direct comparison to this life, and that we cannot fully worship a God we cannot understand, that does not mesh with the rest of LDS doctrine about the afterlife. I cannot remember which LDS President said it, but we are all gods in embryo. I think it was actually John Taylor or Wilford Woodruff who said we have all the characteristics Godhead in its embryonic state.

How much can an embryo comprehend the nature of existence of an adult human being? Not at all. The environment, circumstances, and exigencies differ so tremendously as to make it impossible.

Approaching comprehension of the the state of eternal communion first entails recognizing the incorporeal condition of God the father, and this His incarnation as one of us as the only Body he has. It particularly means understanding the unique nature of His conception as having no physical Father at all, as your Book of Mormon even decribes: He is Himself the Very Eternal Father, and is the Son by virtue of taking on Flesh, and this is part of His Eternal Nature, as your Book of Ether in the Book of Mormon shows.

This leads to recognizing the unique condition in which He created His Mother. Then we begin to recognize the Eternal role His Mother plays in His Plan of Salvation, and her role as a revealer of Christ to the World – even today… With that understanding we can begin to comprehend the nature of the Lord’s relationship to His Mother, which is why Catholics pray the Rosary. Meditating on this we begin to get a sense of our relationship to God in the Heavenly realm, enriching our experience in Mass, where we experience what we can of it in this existence.

Enough of this brings a proper frame of mind to read the Song of Solomon without perceiving anything sexual about it at all. This is where God communicates more completely than in any other scripture the blessed state of the Church in full communion with God – but you can’t explain it. Academics can break it down and describe the symbols, but understanding it is a very personal experience. It requires a mind open to Divine influence and revelation with a correct concept of the nature of God and the Incarnation. With that reading that book can literally alter your state of conciousness, just as the Rosary does.

You can study what is written of it to prepare for when the understanding comes, but when it happens it is not like intellectual interpretation. It is like a flip switches in your head and sudddenly you understand everything different.

Here is my answer: The quality of relationship we have with anyone in Heaven is not a matter of an assigned state. It is a matter of the quality of the relationship we have attained before we get there. Heaven goes by one covenant alone, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Whatever we feel in the presence of our loved ones will be there with the same qualities we have, but magnified and enhanced by the overwhelming mutual communion with God.

In Heaven if all you do is hangout with your spouse the same way as anyone else, then that is all you’ve done here. For my part, just hanging out with my wife on Earth is different than hanging out with anyone else. While the state of marriage is just a mortal state, it is still a religious vocation like being a Priest or a Deacon. I would expect some associated eternal blessings to accompany embracing this vocation, just as it comes with embracing a Holy Order. I am content to trust God with the details. It matters more how I keep those covenants now.
 
Since the word, ‘sacrament’ is not in the Bible, well neither is Moroni.

How do you justify Moroni and the Book of Mormon? It is not part of the bible.
 
So let me ask you all this. Abraham covenanted with the Lord–he promised to follow Him and the Lord promised to bless him through his family. In Genesis, Jacob blesses his twelves sons and the covenant that the Lord made with Abraham he made with Israel. So what was the point of the covenant? Why didn’t they just enjoy communion?
The answer to this begins with three things: First recognizing that “all mankind were in a lost and fallen state” and there was no communion without some intervention. There was no baptism. We were not born children of God because of this separation, but become Children of God through covenant. Second, that God, not Abraham, initiated this covenant and that in doing so he reached out to Abraham in terms Abraham could understand.

Third, and perhaps most important, why circumcision as a sign of the covenant? What would Abraham have understood about the nature of such an act in cutting a covenant in his culture?
 
Also, KathleenGee, I meant the word Sacrament is not in the Bible. Catholic marriage or at least marriage in general started with Adam & Eve I presume.
Ephesians 5:32
This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the church.
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

Context:
28So also ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself.

29For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ doth the church:
30Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh.32This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the church.

The word “sacrament” is also in the Book of Mormon, referring to the common LDS use of the word to refer to its symbolic Eucharist.

The word “endowment” is neither in the Book of Mormon nor the King James Bible
 
Yes, Mormons use the word, ‘sacrament’, and it is also used in their services.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top