harmony wrote:The noncancellation of a sealing for a divorced woman does not stop her from getting married again. It may stop her from getting married in the temple and/or sealed to someone else, but it certainly does not stop her from marrying again, finding joy, having a family, etc.
Such narrow thinking makes me wonder about the ability of women in the church to grow some backbone.
And who would children of that marriage be sealed to, the previous husband? If my mom is sealed to her ex husband and not to my dad who do I get sealed to? No one, or my mom's previous husband, how does this make sense? This whole sealing thing looks like a total mess to me.
café crema wrote:And who would children of that marriage be sealed to, the previous husband? If my mom is sealed to her ex husband and not to my dad who do I get sealed to? No one, or my mom's previous husband, how does this make sense? This whole sealing thing looks like a total mess to me.
Actually it's divorce that is a mess.
The children are sealed to their parents. If one of the parents is not faithful to their covenants, neither the children nor the faithful parent are disadvantaged thereby.
harmony wrote:The noncancellation of a sealing for a divorced woman does not stop her from getting married again. It may stop her from getting married in the temple and/or sealed to someone else, but it certainly does not stop her from marrying again, finding joy, having a family, etc.
Such narrow thinking makes me wonder about the ability of women in the church to grow some backbone.
That's all right, "Tithing Trough" Harmony. Nobody expects you to understand believing Latter-day Saints of any gender.
liz3564 wrote:Ah, but did Joseph allow multiple sealings for women?
My hunch is that he did not. The women that were sealed to him were ONLY sealed to him for eternity. Some women were sealed to their husbands for time. Eliza Snow was an example of this. She was sealed to Joseph for eternity, and BY for time.
And how does this really make it better? How is it better that Zina was sealed for eternity to Joseph? What about Henry, who are the children sealed to?
café crema wrote:And who would children of that marriage be sealed to, the previous husband? If my mom is sealed to her ex husband and not to my dad who do I get sealed to? No one, or my mom's previous husband, how does this make sense? This whole sealing thing looks like a total mess to me.
Actually it's divorce that is a mess.
The children are sealed to their parents. If one of the parents is not faithful to their covenants, neither the children nor the faithful parent are disadvantaged thereby.
Regards, Pahoran
So mom gets a spanking new husband and the kids get a new father. Such an ugly thought, think nothing of that other man here's your dad.
café crema wrote:And who would children of that marriage be sealed to, the previous husband? If my mom is sealed to her ex husband and not to my dad who do I get sealed to? No one, or my mom's previous husband, how does this make sense? This whole sealing thing looks like a total mess to me.
Actually it's divorce that is a mess.
The children are sealed to their parents. If one of the parents is not faithful to their covenants, neither the children nor the faithful parent are disadvantaged thereby.
Regards, Pahoran
Death is messy too and one of those things unavoidable in life. Sealing is just a mess no getting around it.
Pahoran wrote:Actually it's divorce that is a mess.
The children are sealed to their parents. If one of the parents is not faithful to their covenants, neither the children nor the faithful parent are disadvantaged thereby.
Regards, Pahoran
So mom gets a spanking new husband and the kids get a new father. Such an ugly thought, think nothing of that other man here's your dad.
I note that you assume that the father must be the unfaithful parent. I wonder why that would be?
You also seem to see the children as children forever. In fact, children do grow up eventually. At least, most children do.
café crema wrote:Death is messy too and one of those things unavoidable in life. Sealing is just a mess no getting around it.
I fail to see why death complicates things here. Death is the primal problem; sealing actually is an important part of the solution.
Jason Bourne wrote: Last of all a temple president I know once said that the leaders want to leave a sealing in force until another may replace it because it is a required ordinance for exaltation and if say a woman cancels one without another in place her exaltation may be in jeopardy. Whether that us his opinion or official I do not know.
And what does that say about the belief that no one who has lived up to their covenants (or how ever you want to phrase it) will not be denied blessings and they will be given the opportunity to have these ordinances performed before the resurrection? Apparently they really don't know how it works and are afraid that is not really the case.
café crema wrote:Regards, Pahoran So mom gets a spanking new husband and the kids get a new father. Such an ugly thought, think nothing of that other man here's your dad.
I note that you assume that the father must be the unfaithful parent. I wonder why that would be?
I wasn't really thinking about anyone being "unfaithful".
Pahoran wrote:You also seem to see the children as children forever. In fact, children do grow up eventually. At least, most children do.
And that's just another ridiculous point of sealing families together.
café crema wrote:Death is messy too and one of those things unavoidable in life. Sealing is just a mess no getting around it. I fail to see why death complicates things here. Death is the primal problem; sealing actually is an important part of the solution.
Regards, Pahoran
Sealing doesn't solve any problems it creates problems.
Jason Bourne wrote:Last of all a temple president I know once said that the leaders want to leave a sealing in force until another may replace it because it is a required ordinance for exaltation and if say a woman cancels one without another in place her exaltation may be in jeopardy. Whether that us his opinion or official I do not know.
And what does that say about the belief that no one who has lived up to their covenants (or how ever you want to phrase it) will not be denied blessings and they will be given the opportunity to have these ordinances performed before the resurrection? Apparently they really don't know how it works and are afraid that is not really the case.
Apparently they do know how it works. Apparently you do not.
If you were to calm down for five minutes and think things through, it might occur to you that opportunities are extended to people post mortem only to the extent they did not have them in vivo. A person who voluntarily turned away from an ordinance of exaltation after she had received it, simply because she was offended (even if well offended) by another party, cannot be said to have not had the opportunity.