Yesterday, I happened across this post, shared by a friend on Facebook:
"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:
An exhaustive examination of the Family Proclamation can be found here:
Here is a printable version:
No comments:
Post a Comment