Question for Mormons: Explain your practice of 'sealing' the departed?

[Jerusha]

Is that admitting to reincarnation??

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

**Retitled the thread.
I can hardly put “Marrying dead people” into the Hot Topics this week.
**

 

[JustaServant]

This is going straight to Broadway. Elton does the score?

It’ll certainly liven up the cannibal scenes:

The leg bone’s connected to the knee bone,
The knee bone’s connected to the thigh bone,
The thigh bone’s connected to the hip bone…

 

[TexanKnight]

**Retitled the thread.
I can hardly put “Marrying dead people” into the Hot Topics this week.
**

lol…good point…

 

[zaffiroborant]

**Retitled the thread.
I can hardly put “Marrying dead people” into the Hot Topics this week.
**

Thanks I posted the thread rather hurriedly, and did not and look at it right away. When I came back and looked at it it was too late to change and I wished I had worded it differently.
Though I’m not looking for why, I want Mormon_Cultist to present this evidence he/she claims shows that early Christians believed and practiced this.

 

[iloveangels]

**retitled the thread.
I can hardly put “marrying dead people” into the hot topics this week.
**

roflol!!!

 

[tundramom]

I was never “worthy” to attend the temple (for which I am now grateful!). I did baptisms for the dead… standing in proxy for that person. That is what they do for marriages as well. In fact, baptisms and marriages (or endowments as they are called) are the very reason the LDS church has such an awesome database of genaeology.
Steph

 

[Publisher]

If a Mormon made fun of one of the sacred ordinances/sacraments which Catholics celebrate/participate in…my bet…if I were a gambling man…would be they would be banned…warned…get one or more of the infamous “points”…seems to me respect for others beliefs is a “one way street”.

 

[tundramom]

I would have to agree, Publisher. I guess it’s human nature when someone says they can back up a claim and then all you see/hear is crickets. There really IS no Biblical or historical proof of marrying the dead in Christianity. Since it was a revelation to the LDS, that should be sufficient. Trying to proove something that wasn’t there just isn’t possible.
Steph

 

[Publisher]

I would have to agree, Publisher. I guess it’s human nature when someone says they can back up a claim and then all you see/hear is crickets. There really IS no Biblical or historical proof of marrying the dead in Christianity. Since it was a revelation to the LDS, that should be sufficient. Trying to proove something that wasn’t there just isn’t possible.
Steph

While there may be no historical proof…all a Catholic has to do is open their scriptures to Matthew 7:12 to see what the “catholic” position should be……at least one would hope so…“human nature” not withstanding.

 

[tundramom]

While there may be no historical proof…all a Catholic has to do is open their scriptures to Matthew 7:12 to see what the “catholic” position should be……at least one would hope so…“human nature” not withstanding.

Agreed.
Steph

 

[StephenKent]

Latter-day Saints read Genesis 2:25 and 3:3 to suggest that Adam and Eve were husband and wife *prior *to the time death was introduced into this world. In other words, the institution of marriage came into existence in this world *before *death was introduced into this world. And thus, Latter-day Saints glean from this the notion that in the original establishment of the institution of marriage, God did not make it an “until-death-do-you-part” proposition. That is a simple introduction to the belief of the Latter-day Saints that marriage is and institution that, in the first instance, did not take into account the existence of death.

Latter-day Saints read the phrase “giving in marriage” to mean what they feel its original underlying meaning implies: that of a father “giving” his daughter as a bride to a man in marriage. The Latter-day Saints look at the word “marrying” as meaning not that a marriage ceremony is performed in some post-mortal spirit existence but that all marriages are performed in this world. All “marrying” and “giving in marriage” occur in this life, not in the next. Latter-day Saints believe that a marriage performed here *on behalf of *a departed soul is much like a baptism performed by a living person *for *a departed soul, being akin to the baptism for the dead of which the Apostle Paul spoke (1 Cor. 15:29).

Contrary to the way in which the question is worded, Latter-day Saints do not speak of “marrying the departed” either in the sense of someone living marrying someone dead (which is one unfortunately confusing implication of the way in which the inartfully worded question can be misunderstood to mean) or in the sense of performing an actual marriage of two departed souls. It is, rather, a concept solely of performing a “sealing” ordinance on behalf of the departed (much in the same spirit that Roman Catholics will pray *for *the deceased); we believe the departed are dead in body only, but continue to live as souls. We apply the language of the scriptures to the concept: what is “sealed” on earth is “sealed” in heaven.

Of course, with that simple explanation, I trust that the attacks will come from many readers. That’s fine. It seems to be the tilt taken in these threads. But I thought at least some perspective could be offered to address the question.

 

[ComeHome2Rome]

StephenKent,

Are there any other ordinances that the LDS church practices for the dead besides baptism and sealing?

Please let me know which of the below is an accurate understanding of what you are trying to convey:

1. The Sealing Ceremony in the Temple can be performed for 2 deceased people who were married while alive on earth, but had not had their marriage Sealed in an LDS Temple when they were living.

or

1. The Sealing Cermony in the Temple can be performed for 2 deceased people who may or may not have known each other while alive on earth, but now someone from the LDS church wants them to be in a Sealed marriage in the after-life.

or

1. Both of the above are accurate.

Depending on your response, I may have a follow up question or two.

Thanks,
ComeHome2Rome

It is, rather, a concept solely of performing a “sealing” ordinance on behalf of the departed We apply the language of the scriptures to the concept: what is “sealed” on earth is “sealed” in heaven. (The word “hus band” literally comes from the “banding” or “binding” or “sealing” of a “hus” or “house” or “household.”)

 

[TexanKnight]

That is a weak response. They were also sinless before death came into the world yet they did not remain sinless afterwards. They were also naked before death came into the world, they did not remain that way afterwards. Death changed everything they knew

 

[iloveangels]

If a Mormon made fun of one of the sacred ordinances/sacraments which Catholics celebrate/participate in…my bet…if I were a gambling man…would be they would be banned…warned…get one or more of the infamous “points”…seems to me respect for others beliefs is a “one way street”.

Publisher, this isn’t the Mormon Answers Forum.

Besides, baptizing people after they’re dead, especially to something they never would have consented to while alive, is just wrong… Particularly how they do it, with an endowment in a temple. Ack. Disrespect for the dead, if you ask me. [The same thing applies to marriage of dead people. Ack.]

 

[RebeccaJ]

Latter-day Saints read Genesis 2:25 and 3:3 to suggest that Adam and Eve were husband and wife *prior *to the time death was introduced into this world. In other words, the institution of marriage came into existence in this world *before *death was introduced into this world. And thus, Latter-day Saints glean from this the notion that in the original establishment of the institution of marriage, God did not make it an “until-death-do-you-part” proposition. That is a simple introduction to the belief of the Latter-day Saints that marriage is and institution that, in the first instance, did not take into account the existence of death.

Latter-day Saints read the phrase “giving in marriage” to mean what they feel its original underlying meaning implies: that of a father “giving” his daughter as a bride to a man in marriage. The Latter-day Saints look at the word “marrying” as meaning not that a marriage ceremony is performed in some post-mortal spirit existence but that all marriages are performed in this world. All “marrying” and “giving in marriage” occur in this life, not in the next. Latter-day Saints believe that a marriage performed here *on behalf of *a departed soul is much like a baptism performed by a living person *for *a departed soul, being akin to the baptism for the dead of which the Apostle Paul spoke (1 Cor. 15:29).

Contrary to the way in which the question is worded, Latter-day Saints do not speak of “marrying the departed” either in the sense of someone living marrying someone dead (which is one unfortunately confusing implication of the way in which the inartfully worded question can be misunderstood to mean) or in the sense of performing an actual marriage of two departed souls. It is, rather, a concept solely of performing a “sealing” ordinance on behalf of the departed (much in the same spirit that Roman Catholics will pray *for *the deceased); we believe the departed are dead in body only, but continue to live as souls. We apply the language of the scriptures to the concept: what is “sealed” on earth is “sealed” in heaven.

Of course, with that simple explanation, I trust that the attacks will come from many readers. That’s fine. It seems to be the tilt taken in these threads. But I thought at least some perspective could be offered to address the question.

There are documented instances of single Catholic saints being sealed to someone in a Mormon temple.

sltrib.com/lds/ci_13546142

 

[RebeccaJ]

That is a weak response. They were also sinless before death came into the world yet they did not remain sinless afterwards. They were also naked before death came into the world, they did not remain that way afterwards. Death changed everything they knew

Yes, by the sin of Adam and Eve we were all separated from God. Death became DEATH, the end. Through Jesus Christ we are reconciled, sealed by His blood. There is no reason to be sealed to each other.

 

[iloveangels]

There are documented instances of single Catholic saints being sealed to someone in a Mormon temple.

sltrib.com/lds/ci_13546142

I have no idea what they think they might be accomplishing. Weird. Leave it to the Mormons for just plain weirdness.

I guess they’re counting on the fact that when a person is dead, they can’t object to undergoing something they wouldn’t have consented to when alive. As long as they don’t get around to kidnapping live people…

Strange…and disgusting.

 

[1voice]

If a Mormon made fun of one of the sacred ordinances/sacraments which Catholics celebrate/participate in…my bet…if I were a gambling man…would be they would be banned…warned…get one or more of the infamous “points”…seems to me respect for others beliefs is a “one way street”.

I’v noticed that for a long time.

 

[Publisher]

Publisher, this isn’t the Mormon Answers Forum.

Besides, baptizing people after they’re dead, especially to something they never would have consented to while alive, is just wrong… Particularly how they do it, with an endowment in a temple. Ack. Disrespect for the dead, if you ask me. [The same thing applies to marriage of dead people. Ack.]

So that excuses Catholics being disrespectful to Mormons and their sacred traditions and rites?