Are Women Treated Differently In the Celestial Kingdom?

 Yesterday, I happened across this post, shared by a friend on Facebook:

By: JM Janice Barlow

"This is just a question:

In your doctrine, if a woman is never sealed in marriage, is the only hope she has of attaining the celestial kingdom - to become a beloved servant of the married people forever?

I understand that your doctrine CHANGED so that single women can become sealed AFTER death to avoid this, but that was a change in doctrine. I’d like to see the verses of the new doctrine that explains this.

(I’m a married Christian woman and this is not my doctrine but I have seen posts from single LDS women who are concerned about this)."

The post was accompanied by this meme:

As modern Apostles have clarified, individual historical quotes do not equal official Church tenets. Elder Neil L. Andersen explained that true doctrine is 'taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve' and isn't 'hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk.' Furthermore, Elder D. Todd Christofferson noted that 'a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal... opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church.' Erastus Snow's 1857 remarks fall precisely into this category of personal, historical speculation rather than canonized doctrine.

The quote in the image represents a historical, personal commentary rather than established Latter-day Saint doctrine. To find the actual doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regarding single individuals in the next life, we have to look at the canonized scriptures, specifically the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C).

Here is how the doctrine actually works, which clarifies a couple of common misconceptions:

1. It Applies Equally to Men and Women

The scriptural doctrine regarding those who do not enter into eternal marriage applies across the board—to **both men and women**. There is no gender distinction or single-gender disadvantage in the scriptures on this matter.

2. The Scriptural Basis (D&C 132)

The verses that govern this are found in **Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–17**, which were recorded in 1843 (well before the 1857 quote in the meme). The scripture states that any individual—man or woman—who does not marry by the proper authority for eternity:

"...remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever."* (D&C 132:17)

The scripture explains that these individuals are still in a "saved condition" in the Celestial Kingdom, but they act as ministering angels or servants "for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory" (D&C 132:16). It is a status based on the lack of a marriage covenant, not a gender-based punishment.

3. Has the Doctrine Changed?

There actually hasn't been a change in the core doctrine, but rather a consistent application of the principle of proxy ordinances (temple work for the dead), which has been practiced by the Church since the 1840s (see D&C 124 and 128).

Latter-day Saints believe in a perfectly just and loving Heavenly Father. Because of this, the doctrine has always held that no individual will be denied any blessing—including eternal marriage—due to circumstances outside of their control in mortality (such as never finding a spouse, dying young, etc.).

* **Opportunity in the Post-Earth Life:** Church doctrine teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have passed away (found in D&C 138).

Proxy Sealings: Living people can perform sealings in temples on behalf of deceased ancestors. If a single woman (or man) passes away without the opportunity to marry, that sealing can be performed by proxy. It is entirely up to that individual in the spirit world to freely accept or decline that covenant.

Summary

The quote attributed to Erastus Snow from the *Journal of Discourses* reflects individual 19th-century speculation, but it is not Church doctrine. Church doctrine is found in the standard works, which make it clear that single men and single women are treated exactly the same, that salvation in the Celestial Kingdom is open to them as angels, and that every single person will ultimately have a fair, full opportunity to accept or decline the covenant of eternal marriage.

In addition, during the lifetime of Erastus Snow (An apostle, not the President of the Church) the national, even global attitude towards women and women's rights was poor.  Without knowing the man personally, I can assume that the prevailing attitudes towards women and women's rights would have an effect on his personal opinion.  During Erastus Snow’s lifetime (1818–1888), women across the United States faced severe restrictions under the law, including the legal doctrine of coverture, which meant a married woman's legal rights were subsumed by those of her husband—restricting her ability to own property, sign contracts, or keep her own wages.

However, the history of women's rights in Utah Territory during Snow's life features a fascinating, counter-intuitive twist.

While women nationally were denied the right to vote, early Utah was actually a trailblazer for women's suffrage:  

First to Vote in the Nation: In February 1870, Utah’s territorial legislature unanimously passed a law granting women the right to vote. Two days later, on February 14, 1870, a schoolteacher named Seraph Young became the first woman in the modern United States to legally cast a ballot under an equal suffrage law.  

It surprises many people to learn that 19th-century Latter-day Saint leaders like Brigham Young and Erastus Snow strongly favored giving women the right to vote.

So, while the prevailing 19th-century American view certainly treated women as legally and socially subordinate, Erastus Snow lived in a unique regional culture where women were simultaneously granted historic political power decades before the rest of the country.

Actually, the truth about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints doctrine towards women and families is well documented here:

The Family: A Proclamation To The World

An exhaustive examination of the Family Proclamation can be found here:

https://rsc.byu.edu/latter-day-saints-washington-dc/prophetic-nature-family-proclamation

Here is a printable version:  

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/36035_000_24_family.pdf

Did the Department of War Just Insult the Church?

Yesterday, the Department of War announced that they were reducing the list of religious affiliation designations from over 200 down to 31. I asked Google why this was even an issue and this was the reply:

Gemini:
"The Core Conflict: Inclusivity vs. Institutional Tradition

For the past couple of decades, the Department of Defense steadily expanded its religious preference registry. The goal under previous administrations was total inclusivity—ensuring that every single belief system, from mainstream denominations to niche groups like Wiccans, Heathens, and secular Humanists, had an official, state-recognized box to check.

To critics and the current leadership under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, that expansion wasn't just administrative bloat; it was viewed as a symptom of a broader cultural drift. The argument from the current administration is that by trying to accommodate every minor or secular faction, the military chaplaincy was losing its foundational focus on the core faith traditions that have historically sustained American warfighters in combat.

What the DoD Actually Gains From the 31-Code Limit

By drawing a hard line and restricting the registry strictly to major, established global religions (and grouping most Christian traditions under the "Christian -" prefix), the Pentagon achieves three distinct tactical goals:

Defunding and De-prioritizing Niche Chaplaincy: The military allocates its budget and recruits chaplains based directly on registry data. If there is no official code for a specific minor faith or secular group, there is no administrative justification to spend taxpayer money recruiting, training, or supplying specialized chaplains or materials for those groups.

Enforcing a Unified Corporate Identity: By grouping Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, and others into a streamlined "Christian" nomenclature block, the system emphasizes shared foundational tenets over denominational fractures. For a commander looking at unit readiness, it simplifies a complex demographic puzzle into a clear, unified picture.

Reasserting Traditional Boundaries: Removing explicit codes for Atheists, Humanists, and neo-pagan traditions sends a clear message about the institutional boundaries of the military chaplain corps. It repositions the chaplaincy strictly as a resource for traditional religious faith rather than a generalized counseling or secular advocacy service."

So, there is the rational behind this change. The reason that this is of interest to many of my friends and myself is that the Church of Jesus Christ is not listed under the general "Christian" designation, for example:

Christian - Catholic (CA) Christian - Orthodox (OX) Christian - Baptist (BA) Christian - Lutheran (LU) Christian - Methodist (ME) Christian - Presbyterian (PR) Christian - Assemblies of God (AG) Christian - Evangelical (EV) Christian - Non Denominational (ND) Christian - Other (CO).

The Church received it's own designation: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (CJ).

Utah Senators Mike Lee and John Curtis are protesting and making this an issue. I wonder if we should.

First, an observation. All the other "Christian" denominations must have that designation in order to know they ARE Christian. It's kind of obvious from the name of our Church, don't you think?

Remember, Under official LDS guidance, a Church leader or member is structurally prohibited from engaging in public denunciation, mockery, or aggressive theological arguments against other Christian denominations. The directive is to focus on shared moral values and community service while leaving doctrinal disagreements to respectful, private dialogue. (Refer to Section 38.8.41 of the General Handbook (titled "Relations with Other Faiths"))

That said. Initially, when I first heard about our exclusion from the list of Christian faiths, I, too, was insulted. It does kind of amount to a Governmental disrespect for the LDS Church, especially in view of the name, as mentioned. I kind of agreed with Senators Lee and Curtis. Now...maybe not.

My only real concern is the negative effect this designation might have on investigators, newly converted or anyone who doesn't really have a strong Spiritual testimony of the truth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I mean, face it, there is an incredible amount of opposition to the Church, especially in "Christian" denominations. In a lifetime in this Church, I have never heard a public talk, in any meeting, that was aimed at denigrating or vilifying any other Church, at all...ever. I know, however, that many other denominations waste good pulpit time railing against "The Mormon's", instead of focusing on worshipping the Lord Jesus Christ.

We are very different and there is a reason for that.

Here is my conversation with Gemini on this point:

Larry:
"In which version of the first vision is Joseph told that all the other churches are "an abomination"?

Gemini:
That specific language is found in the **1838 account** of the First Vision. This is the version that was later canonized by the Church and is published today in the Pearl of Great Price as **Joseph Smith—History**.

In this account, Joseph asks the two Personages which of all the sects is right and which he should join. Here is the direct quote of the response he records receiving:

> "I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that **all their creeds were an abomination in his sight**; that those professors were all corrupt; that: 'they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.'"
> — **Joseph Smith—History 1:19**

Key Context on the Wording

* **Creeds vs. Churches:** To be precise, the text states that their *creeds* (the formal theological frameworks and statements of belief, such as the Westminster Confession or the Nicene Creed) were an abomination, rather than explicitly labeling the individual people or the organizations themselves with that word.

* **Other Accounts:** By comparison, Joseph's earliest handwritten account from **1832** is much softer on this point. In that earlier version, he simply records Jesus telling him that mankind had "turned aside from the gospel" and that they "draw near to me with their lips while their hearts are far from me," omitting the strong "abomination" and "corrupt professors" language that he included when dictating the official 1838 history.


The Nicean Creed was a definition of Christianity, essentially ordered by the Roman Emperor Constantine.

The Westminster Confession was created 1,300 years later, after the "Reformation" and was ordered by the English Parliament. Parliament commissioned a gathering of 121 Puritan theologians (known as the Westminster Assembly) to meet at Westminster Abbey in London.

The Goal: Their mission was to completely erase any lingering Roman Catholic or high-church Anglican practices from England, Scotland, and Ireland, creating a brand-new blueprint for a strictly Reformed, Presbyterian national church.

But, those Puritans created a "creed" that was based on the Greek/Roman definitions of Christianity from 1300 years before. To be clear, the Westminster Confession of Faith is based on the original Apostasy from the Lord's true Church.

Many wars have been fought over these creeds since and I don't think we need to be involved in another.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the RESTORED, True, Church of Jesus Christ. It is led by the Savior, through His living Prophet. In truth, we are the ONLY real Christian Church in the world today. We base our doctrine on truths restored, through a Prophet, in these latter days. We are not aligned with those churches that the Department of War define as Christian. We ARE a peculiar people and we need to remain so.

The DoW is now just another organization which claims that the Church of Jesus Christ is not Christian. We've been hearing it from protestant churches since 1829. It's nothing new and the apparent government affirmation of their claims really doesn't change anything. It doesn't prove or disprove anything.

Actually, by giving the Church its own standalone code—The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (CJ)—the Pentagon inadvertently affirmed exactly what Joseph Smith taught: the Church is not a branch on the fractured tree of the Protestant Reformation. It is a completely distinct, sovereign entity rooted in a literal Restoration.

From a position of faith, being grouped under a generic hyphenated prefix with churches practicing doctrines born out of the Westminster Confession or the Nicene Creed would actually dilute what makes the Church unique. If the creeds of those organizations were defined by revelation as "an abomination" because they replaced direct authority with the "commandments of men," then being separated from them in an official government ledger isn't a demotion—it is a reflection of reality. Again, the Church is meant to be a "peculiar people."

I know, from study, from prayer, from personal life and spiritual experience that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the true restored Church on the Earth. Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God and the doctrines taught in this Church are those that will bring us home to our Father in the end. These things are real and true.