Question about status of children after sealing cancellation

[Sullyute]

Tongue-in-cheekiness aside, the more I think about it, the more I think this could factor into why it's such an arduous process. It probably reflects on the leadership's view of the significance of sealings. It might boil down to a belief that a sealing should only be tampered with in rare instances. But if the roles were reversed, think about if the woman was deceased. How would she feel if she was about to share her sealing with another woman, since men can get sealed to others?
All the more reason to treat men and women equally with sealings.

By the way, from what I understand, this woman's first marriage was not ideal. She feels much closer to her second husband.

The Church should start the equality there and then work on the multitude of other ways to treat men and women equally in the church.

[Joe Public]

Tongue-in-cheekiness aside, the more I think about it, the more I think this could factor into why it's such an arduous process. It probably reflects on the leadership's view of the significance of sealings. It might boil down to a belief that a sealing should only be tampered with in rare instances. But if the roles were reversed, think about if the woman was deceased. How would she feel if she was about to share her sealing with another woman, since men can get sealed to others?
All the more reason to treat men and women equally with sealings.

By the way, from what I understand, this woman's first marriage was not ideal. She feels much closer to her second husband.

Perhaps none too happy, but her result is consistent with LDS doctrine. Her sealing to her husband continues, and he can be sealed to other wives. Caveat emptor. In the husband's case, I'm not aware of any LDS teachings that suggest losing an eternal sealing to your family if you've received the ordinance and (presumably) met continued worthiness requirements until the end of your days.

[Northwestcoug]

An update to this story: Although the stake president said it might take 'years' for the first presidency to approve her sealing cancellation, it has apparently been taken care of. She is getting sealed to her 2nd husband in a couple of months, and I assume her child from the first marriage will also be included.

So I'll take back my criticism of the church for needless beauracracy, in this case. Yay church!

[NorthwestUteFan]

That is probably for the best and I am happy for your friend and her husband.

I still am at a loss to understand why it was so important to cancel the sealing of the child to his father. Whatever the purpose, it comes across as a HUGE 'Eff You!!' to the dead father and his family.

Perhaps it is warranted, but it still is a bit strange.

edit: reading comprehension fail. It is highly strange that the SECOND child was considered to be 'sealed' to the dead husband, even though the second child was fathered by the current husband.

[happyone]

FWIW - When I was sealed to my wife, her daughter remained sealed to her first husband, even though her sealing to him had been canceled. We were told to have her sealed to me, he would have to agree to it (he never has) and I would have to adopt my oldest (which hasn't happed because he wouldn't agree to it)

EDIT- this was 20+ yrs ago, I don't know if the procedures have changed

[NorthwestUteFan]

Thought question:

If a woman who is sealed to her husband has an affair and becomes pregnant and has a 'bonus baby', is this child considered to be sealed to the husband (assuming the man and woman remain married)?

[happyone]

Thought question:

If a woman who is sealed to her husband has an affair and becomes pregnant and has a 'bonus baby', is this child considered to be sealed to the husband (assuming the man and woman remain married)?

My understanding is yes - the child is sealed to the husband.

[Paperback Writer]

Thought question:

If a woman who is sealed to her husband has an affair and becomes pregnant and has a 'bonus baby', is this child considered to be sealed to the husband (assuming the man and woman remain married)?

Perhaps that would depend on legal guardianship of the father. Otherwise, I would think it would be similar to happyone's case where one has to be the legal guardian to be sealed. If the husband is on the birth certificate and not the biologial father, then I would think the baby would be considered sealed to both parents. And if the marriage stays intact, I would think the parents would want that for the child as well. Unless they raise the kid while telling him or her "this isn't your real (biological) father". Just my guess.

[Joe Public]

Thought question:

If a woman who is sealed to her husband has an affair and becomes pregnant and has a 'bonus baby', is this child considered to be sealed to the husband (assuming the man and woman remain married)?

Rumor has it that there is a putative father registry at the temple that will be used during the millenium to sort such things out. It is similar in design to the prayer roll box, which has been the source of much confusion.

[SportUTE]

It's stuff like this that tells me God must be a bureaucrat at heart.

[mUUser]

I think it sounds batshit crazy. I think this is a perfect example of mormons wanting everything explained and well organized - a symptom of a lack of faith IMO. It is the same desire for nice clear cut answers that leads to the Elder McConkie's waxing eloquent on black people in the pre-existence. I don't think we know near as much about this stuff as we give ourselves credit. I think the answer is to let as many people get sealed to whomever they want and then trust that God wants what is best for all and that it will all be ok in the long run. Or the other answer is to work through the bureacratic Church how fors and if thats and still trust that God is in charge and it will all work out. Either way the trusting of God part is likely to be the thread that brings the most comfort.

That's the answer to most of the crap that's done in the temple. Otherwise, you'll go insane trying to make any sense of it.

[Northwestcoug]

Thought question:

If a woman who is sealed to her husband has an affair and becomes pregnant and has a 'bonus baby', is this child considered to be sealed to the husband (assuming the man and woman remain married)?

My understanding is yes - the child is sealed to the husband.

Before this experience, I would have laughed at this hypothetical. But now I have to agree with happyone, even though I think it's crazy.

[NorthwestUteFan]

You know, it sounded bizarre to me as well until I thought of the same situation from the perspective of the wholly innocent child.

Why should the child be be punished for 'Adam's Transgression', as it were?

The way this looks to me, however, is somewhat similar to a matriarchal lineage a la Judaism. The child is sealed to the Mother, and also to the man to whom the mother happens to be sealed.

In this case, in order to be sealed to the child's actual father, in this case, he/she was first 'unsealed' from the mother's former husband who passed away long before the child was ever conceived.

NWC, thanks for the update on this situation. And thank you for provoking a bit of thought.

[Sullyute]

An update to this story: Although the stake president said it might take 'years' for the first presidency to approve her sealing cancellation, it has apparently been taken care of. She is getting sealed to her 2nd husband in a couple of months, and I assume her child from the first marriage will also be included.

So I'll take back my criticism of the church for needless beauracracy, in this case. Yay church!

Best wishes to your friend and her new spouse.

In regard to the bolded part it appears that the first child would remain sealed to the original parents even after the cancellation.

Status of Children When a Sealing is Canceled or Revoked:
Children who are born in the covenant or sealed to parents remain so even if the sealing of the parents is later (1) canceled or (2) revoked by the excommunication or name removal of either parent.

[Northwestcoug]

You know, it sounded bizarre to me as well until I thought of the same situation from the perspective of the wholly innocent child.

Why should the child be be punished for 'Adam's Transgression', as it were?

The way this looks to me, however, is somewhat similar to a matriarchal lineage a la Judaism. The child is sealed to the Mother, and also to the man to whom the mother happens to be sealed.

In this case, in order to be sealed to the child's actual father, in this case, he/she was first 'unsealed' from the mother's former husband who passed away long before the child was ever conceived.

NWC, thanks for the update on this situation. And thank you for provoking a bit of thought.

That's an interesting comparison. Thanks for bringing it up.

Best wishes to your friend and her new spouse.

In regard to the bolded part it appears that the first child would remain sealed to the original parents even after the cancellation.

I didn't know that. I wonder if the first child will be part of the ceremony then.