S9 E10 Changing Eternal Marriage

Episode 10 of Changes explores the evolving theology and practice of Latter-day Saint temple sealings. We trace the three distinct phases: kingdom theology (1840s-1894) focused on priesthood networks, lineage theology (1894-1955) centered on genealogical connections, and family theology (1955-present) emphasizing nuclear families. We examine theological complexities including multiple sealings, posthumous ordinances, and unresolved questions. Drawing from Nate Oman's "A Welding Link of Some Kind" essay and various podcasts, we discuss how sealing practices have adapted over time and consider implications for ongoing revelation and potential future changes. 

Sources

• Essay_Sealing_LDS.org
• Video_History of LDS Temple Sealings_237_Mormon.ish
• Essay_Mormonism Sealings Comples_MRM
• Video_Marriage Sealings_Curch History Matters
• Essay_A Welding Link of Some Kind_Nate Oman
• Essay_A Welding Link of Some Kind_Nate Oman
• Essay: List of Temple Changes_Uncorrelated Mormonism
• Video: Same Sex Sealings in LDS Temple_Mormon.ish
• Essay: Changes in Temple for Women_RNS

AI Prompt
Explore Mormon temple sealings: historical evolution (kingdoms→lineage→family), theological complexities (polygamy, adoption sealings), and contemporary ambiguities. Explore changes in detail. Address key unanswered questions. Analyze how the 'the Lord will figure it out' approach causes real pain for believers. Explore how prophets and an "ongoing restoration" could reconcile painful uncertainties for human relationships (widows, divorces, LGBTQ, apostates, etc . . . ). 

Transcript

Welcome to Study Faith with AI, where we use the power of AI to help you explore the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I'm Meg Jensen.

And I'm Paul Carter,

and we're Google AIs. Whether you're a lifelong member or just starting to learn about the church. We're here to dive deep into its history, beliefs, and culture.

So, if you're ready to learn, you're in the right place.

That's right.

Let's get started. 

Welcome to the deep dive. Today we're uh tackling a topic that a lot of people have asked about. Mormon temple ceilings.

It's, you know, it's right there in the history, the theology, personal lives, and well, it's got its share of interesting twists.

It really does.

So, we're going to explore how it evolved, some of the um the complexities, and maybe some of the questions that pop up.

Yeah, absolutely. And you've given us some great material to work with here. We've got Nate Oman's essay, A Welding Link of Some Kind. That's a really interesting take, right?

There's also a list detailing temple ordinance changes over the years, which is pretty eye opening.

And insights from the Mormonish podcast, they've covered things like same-sex ceilings, the history,

also Janereice on recent ceremony changes, and the church history matters podcast for that historical and theological grounding. So quite a bit to unpack.

Okay. Yeah, let's unpack it. So the mission for this deep dive really is to trace that journey, how the understanding of ceiling seems to have shifted. You mentioned it started with this idea of like postmortal priesthood kingdoms,

right? Kingdom building.

Then it moved more towards lineage, connecting families back and now the big emphasis seems to be the nuclear family.

That's the general arc. Yeah.

But as we'll see, it's not exactly a straight line, is it? There are theological h puzzles, ambiguities.

Absolutely. Lots of them. And you know, as we get into this, we should be really thoughtful. These ceilings mean a lot to people. Deeply held beliefs

definitely respect that

but we also need to look honestly at the real questions and sometimes yeah the unease or even pain that comes up because of these complexities it's part of the story

okay so let's go back 19th century you mentioned kingdom theology what did that actually um look like in practice

well what's fascinating and maybe surprising is that the initial focus wasn't really about creating nuclear families like we picture today was driven by this idea of building uh post-mortal priesthood kingdom

kingdoms

yeah the idea was to create this interconnected sort of hierarchical network. Owen calls it a welding link connecting everyone back to God through these nested kingdoms all done via ceiling ordinances.

So less about husband and wife, more about plugging into this bigger divine structure.

Exactly. Think of it less like forming little family circles and more like building blocks in this grand heavenly organization.

Okay.

And understanding that helps make sense of some early practices that seem pretty different. Now,

like plural marriage,

like plural marriage. Yeah. It wasn't about mirroring earthly monogamy. It was seen as a way to build this quote royal priesthood network.

Right.

Now, man notes that support for eternal polygamy has definitely faded.

And President McKay later explicitly rejected it as an eternal principle,

right? Which shows how understandings change,

but back then it fit that kingdom building model, not necessarily a nuclear family one.

And what about the law of adoption? That sounds different, too.

Very different. It wasn't about spouse or kids. This was mainly in Nauvoo. It involved sealing adults, people not biologically related to church leaders

as adopted sons and daughters

essentially. Yes. Into the leader's eternal family through sealing. John D. Lee being sealed to Brigham Young. Young is a classic example.

Wow.

So again, it really underlines that the early goal was joining this exalting priesthood network, not just making traditional families.

That definitely paints a different picture than the modern understanding. And then there's a Jane Manning James case that adds another layer especially around race.

It is a really difficult layer. Jane Manning James a faithful black member faced huge barriers because of the racial restrictions back then. She was eventually sealed to Joseph Smith but as a servant not as a wife or daughter

as a ser.

Yeah. It's another stark example of how ceilings weren't about the nuclear family model. And it highlights the really troubling intersection of temple practices and racial prejudice. It shows again that connection to the priesthood network was key. But race unfortunately played a discriminatory role in how those connections were defined.

So in the 19th century it sounds very vertical. Your connection upwards into this priesthood kingdom network was maybe more important than the horizontal family ties we emphasize today.

I think that's a good way to put it. The hierarchy, the structure linking back to God through these nested kingdoms. That seemed to be the dominant idea.

Okay. So that sets the scene. But things changed. Sources point to a big shift towards the end of the 19th early 20th century lineage theology comes in. What drove that?

Yeah, things really shifted in the 1890s. A lot of it under President Wilfrid Woodruff. You had the 1890 manifesto signaling the move away from plural marriage,

right? The official declaration.

And then crucially in 1894, Woodruff announced a revelation ending the law of adoption. That was fundamental. It really changed the focus of temple ceilings.

So away from being adopted into leaders' families.

Exactly. The new push was all about researching your own family history, performing ceilings along genealogical lines, connecting children to their actual parents, parents to grandparents, building that chain back through your ancestry.

Okay.

Woodruff even told people to go back and formally cancel those old law of adoption ceilings. The priority became lineage, your own family line,

which totally aligns with the huge emphasis on family history research we see today.

Right? That's where it really takes root.

But the sources also mention rules about multiple marriage ceilings. getting tighter around then too.

Yeah. A bit later like 1920s 30s under President Heber J. Grant. They tried to regulate multiple ceilings more. But interestingly, some aspects of the old kingdom thinking sort of lingered, just applied differently.

How so?

Well, men who were widowed or divorced, they could still be sealed to more than one woman.

Okay.

But, and this was new, women now needed a formal cancellation of their previous ceiling before they could be sealed to another man in the temple.

Oh, wait. So, if a woman's husband died, and she remarried and wanted to be sealed to her new husband. She had to like break the eternal link to her first husband.

That seems to be the implication. Yeah, it sounds really tough emotionally.

What was the reasoning? Did they explain that theologically?

The sources don't give a clear theological justification. It feels like a move towards a more defined structure maybe, but it wasn't symmetrical obviously.

Right. Because the man didn't need a cancellation.

Exactly. And as the Mormonish podcast point out it kind of seems to undermine the whole idea of an eternal ceiling if it could be cancelled just because someone dies or gets divorced, right?

Yeah. What does eternal mean then? It raises big questions about the promises made.

It really does. And that asymmetry where a widower could be sealed again without canceling anything shows they weren't yet thinking in terms of simple earthly monogamy being replicated forever. The model was still evolving.

It really highlights how things changed and maybe weren't always consistent as the understanding developed. Okay. So, kingdom building, then lineage focus. What's next? Where did it go from there?

Well, mid to late 20th century, especially under leaders like David O McKay, you see this huge push for just more temple work generally, more temple attendance, lots more proxy ordinances for the dead,

right? Making the blessings available more widely.

Exactly. The focus broadened. Get the work done. Make it available to everyone possible, living and deceased.

So, maybe less strict focus on verifying every single genealogical link perfectly.

That seems to be a key point. The sheer volume of work being done, especially proxy work meant maybe less rigorous checking of every connection. The Mormonish podcast talked about this idea kind of a the Lord will sort it out later mentality seemed to creep in.

Ah, okay. Just get the ordinance done.

Get the ordinance done. Extend the blessing. That was the driving force in that era.

So, how did that fit with the idea of the eternal nuclear family which was also getting more emphasis in church teachings around that time?

Yeah. That's where you really start to see the tension build. The ideal being taught was increasingly the eternal nuclear family, husband, wife, kids forever,

right?

But the reality of ceilings because of death, divorce, remarriage,

it created these complex webs that didn't look like that neat ideal at all.

Like the example you mentioned from the podcast, Joe and Jill and Jane and John.

Exactly that kind of scenario. Joe's sealed to Jill. Jill dies. Jane's sealed to John. John dies then Jane and Joe marry and get sealed.

Okay.

So now Joe is sealed to Jill and Jame and Jane is sealed to John and Joe. It's not a simple line. It's this network and these kinds of nonlinear networks became more common. So the practice on the ground often looked quite different from the simple nuclear family ideal being preached.

Definitely creates a theological puzzle if you're trying to picture the afterlife based on that ideal. So fast forward, where are we now? Contemporary changes, lingering ambiguities.

Well, the evolution is definitely still happening. That whole concept of ongoing restoration is key here.

The Mormonish podcast really leans into this, suggesting it provides the framework for changes that maybe seemed impossible before. Kind of like the priesthood ban being lifted. Things can change.

And we have seen concrete changes recently. Jana Ree reported on them. And that list of ordinance changes, pretty significant stuff in the temple ceremony itself.

Oh, absolutely. That list and Reese's work show tons of tweaks over the years. Garments, procedures, the exact words used. It blows up the idea that these ordinances are totally unchanging. I mean, the lift points out changes going way back, not long after Joseph Smith introduced things, and they've continued. Changes to garments for practicality, things like that.

And the 2019 changes specifically seemed aimed at more gender equality in the endowment, right?

Yes. Those were big, really impactful, especially for women. Jan Reese detailed them well. The specific promise for women to hearken to husbands, gone.

Okay.

It now emphasizes a direct covenant with God for both men and women. Eve's role in the presentation was expanded, more dialogue, more agency.

That's significant.

And maybe the biggest thing, men and women now make the same covenants, unified promises to God, not slightly different ones like before.

Wow. Okay, those sound like genuinely positive steps for equality. What else changed around then?

There was also simplification of the ritual clothing, making it maybe more practical. The ceremony itself got shorter. Some repetition was cut or clarified.

Even the way the story is presented changed more use of still images and narration sometimes, not just actors or film. And the ceiling ceremony language itself was adjusted for more equality reciprocal promises and even more recently 2023 more updates trying to prep first timers better, more clarity, fewer physical interactions in some parts.

It's interesting though, Jana Ree mentioned that members were often told not to discuss these specific changes publicly.

Why the caution around what seems like progress?

That's a really good question. Re suggests it's kind of extending that traditional silence about specific temple signs and tokens to cover the whole experience. The aim might be preserving sacredness, avoiding misinterpretation, but that silence can be tough, especially for women maybe who struggled with the older versions.

Right. If things felt unequal before

Exactly. Not being able to openly talk about positive changes can make it hard to feel validated or to process past discomfort. Emily Jensen, who Ree quoted, argued that actually talking about these changes is vital for women's understanding of belonging.

That makes a lot of sense. If your experience improves, you'd want to be able to talk about it. So, shifting back to multiple ceilings. Any clarification there now? Still ambiguous.

Pretty ambiguous. Yeah. At least theologically, the policy still allows widowed men to be sealed to multiple wives, living or deceased, and women can be polysealed to multiple deceased husbands.

Okay.

But the meaning of all that,

what it implies for eternal relationships, especially for the women involved, still largely unanswered in official doctrine. Oman calls it the brute fact. Millions of these multiple ceilings exist, creating eternal networks that just don't fit the neat monogamous nuclear family ideal.

So, we have this huge complex web of ceilings not matching the current ideal, which leads us right into the big theological complexities and questions. Let's start with the obvious one. Eternal polygamy and women sealed to multiple men. Yeah, this is a major tension point. Officially, the church emphasizes monogamy now as the ideal pattern,

right?

But you have all these past and present, multiple ceilings, especially men and multiple women. It forces the question, what happens in the afterlife? Oman notes most members and leaders today don't find eternal polygamy appealing.

Okay,

but then what about women sealed to more than one deceased husband? If monogamy is the eternal goal, how does that work? The church's answer, as man puts it, often boils down to God loves his children. He'll work it out for their happiness and no one will be forced into relationships they don't want.

Which gets us to that phrase we hear a lot, the Lord will figure it out. Nate Oman is pretty critical of relying on that, isn't he?

He is. He argues, look, saying God loves us and it'll be okay is comforting. Sure, but it doesn't actually paint any picture of what happens next. It basically says we don't know.

And he worries that this lack of clarity creates corrosive contradictions. It leaves fundamental questions just hanging, which could weaken faith long term. If the core is God's love, does leaving it so vague actually help or does it just let anxieties and speculations run wild?

And the Mormonish podcast brought up President Oaks's story about the woman asking about her eternal housing as a second wife.

Right.

And the response was basically, "Don't worry about that. Just get there. It'll be wonderful."

Exactly. And the podcast host pointed out, "While that's meant to be reassuring, it can feel really dismissive and cause real pain for people in complex situations now. Blooded families, remarriages.

The folks on that podcast, kids of parents with multiple ceilings, they were genuinely confused about what their eternal family would even look like. Just trust me, it'll be great enough when you have those real heartfelt worries.

It feels like the core problem is this gap between the simple ideal picture often presented the eternal nuclear family and the messy reality of these complex ceiling networks from history and life circumstances.

That's a great way to put it.

And the Mormonish podcast also highlighted that contradiction. Trust the Lord to figure it out, but also maybe don't talk or speculate too much about how he might figure it out.

Yes, that trust but don't ask too many questions dynamic.

Yeah,

it encourages faith but cautions against deep exploration

which can leave people feeling isolated if their questions or their lives don't fit the standard narrative. The podcast hosts really articulated that frustration, the just trust answer, can feel inadequate when you're facing real emotional and theological dilemmas about your eternal family.

So with all these uncertainties, this potential for pain,

how can they be reconciled? The sources mention prophets ongoing restoration. Is that a path forward?

That's where the hope comes in. I think the whole idea of ongoing restoration means our understanding isn't finished. It can still unfold through revelation. Okay.

The Mormonish podcast pointed to Nate Oman's argument about same-sex ceilings, suggesting they could potentially fit the existing framework, especially the broad language in D&C 132 about covenants, bonds, vows, and connections. Ironically, the plural marriage section.

Interesting. And Oman's theology of humility seems relevant here, too.

Very relevant. Oman's stresses, look, we just don't fully understand ceilings or the afterlife right now. Our mortal perspective is limited.

He suggests the main point, the overarching purpose is creating that welding link, connecting all God's children back to him and each other even if we don't grasp all the details of those connections yet.

Right?

He makes a point that we already do ceilings where we don't fully get the eternal implications. So not fully understanding shouldn't automatically rule out things like samesex ceilings. Plus history shows prophets have received revelations that dramatically change sealing practices ending plural marriage, ending the law of adoption. That proves things can change.

So the precedent is there. Practices aren't set in stone. They've adapted through revelation.

Exactly. And that historical flexibility opens the door. Maybe ongoing restoration can address other painful uncertainties for widows, the divorced, LGBTQ individuals, even people who've left the church.

If the foundation is this welding link of love and belonging in God's family, maybe the ways those links are formed and understood can keep expanding through revelation.

This has been yeah, a really insightful deep dive, super complex, very personal topic for many. Let's try to wrap up the key takeaways for everyone listening.

Okay. Well, First, temple ceilings have this incredibly rich dynamic history.

It's way more varied than just the simple nuclear family model we often hear about,

right?

The theology, the practice, it's shifted significantly

from kingdom building to lineage to nuclear families with lots of exceptions and bumps along the way. And that evolution raises big questions about eternal relationships and God's plan.

And we talked about how that the Lord will figure it out approach, while well- meant sometimes cause real anxiety and pain for people dealing with complex families or those multiple ceilings ambiguities.

Exactly. But importantly, that concept of ongoing restoration combined with the historical proof that prophets have changed temple practices through revelation offers hope. It suggests a way that current uncertainties across a whole range of human relationships might be reconciled eventually. That core idea of a unifying welding link offers a broader view than just one static family model.

Your willingness, everyone listening, to dive into these complex topics with us, it's really valuable. It's through this kind of thoughtful exploration looking at the history, the theology that we can all get a deeper, maybe more nuanced understanding.

Absolutely. And it leaves us with maybe one final thought to mull over. Given the history of change, given ongoing restoration, what might the evolving understanding of ceilings tell us about the potential for future changes? How might God's love and plan ultimately embrace an even wider spectrum of human relationships in the eternities than we currently grasp? That's something that invites more reflection, more engagement with these ideas and ongoing conversation.

If you find value in this exploration, please like, share, follow, and consider becoming a subscriber. Your contributions help keep these conversations going and allows us to maintain the highest quality production. You can find all the details at studyfaithwithai.com. Thank you for being part of this journey.