Here's the sitch: my ex-wife (TBM) is getting married in May to a TBM. I left the lds church about 3 years ago but never had my name removed for fear of my ex-wife being notified and negatively construing it to my 3 young girls that I didn't want them forever.

Does anyone know how/if my ex-wife would be notified and if the lds church considers my girls "unsealed" to me once I get my name removed? I definitley don't want them to go to the temple with my ex-wife and her new husband to get sealed to them if their "sealing" to me is cancelled. Don't want to create any type of divide between us even if it means keeping my name on the records of lds inc.

I have read many times on this site that getting your name removed does not cancel sealings. The reason being is that you could decide to come back to the church and your "blessings" would then be restored. Though your ex could conceivably get a temple divorce and be sealed to her new husband, your kids are considered innocent and would remain sealed to you.

My husband removed his name several years ago. To our knowledge, his ex wife remains sealed to him, though she does now have a Mormon husband. Supposedly, in the case of a temple divorce, the ex's bishop would contact you for your input, even if you had your name removed. In our case, my husband's kids ended up very alienated anyway, but that was not entirely because he removed his name. They were very alienated before he took that step.

I'm sure others will have other experiences to share, though, that might contradict what I've written.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2012 09:56AM by knotheadusc.

It cancells baptism and other ordinances. I assume sealings fall under 'ordinances'.

Not according to long time RfM poster, Wings. She has posted her story many times about trying to get her sealing cancelled, even though she left the church. I suppose it also depends on who's involved, though.

It's weird that your baptism can be cancelled, but not your sealing. Doesn't seem to make sense.

It's all made up nonsense anyway.

I guess in the eyes of church folk, the sealing shouldn't be cancelled when someone gets their name removed because that action could penalize "innocent people" like the faithful spouse and children.

Name removal DOES cancel sealings, according to the church handbook, except for "innocent parties." (So you are not sealed to them, but they are sealed to you - ????)

But the CHI also says that children cannot be sealed to someone who is not a biological or adopted parent, so long as the biological parent is alive and does not give written permission.

But then if you decided to come back to the church and were re-baptized, your blessings would be "restored", so then the sealing is active again, right? Makes my head hurt.

In my husband's case, he and his ex wife were sealed as a family with their two daughters and my husband's ex stepson. Even though my husband never formally adopted his former stepson, the boy was sealed to him. The ex wife had had the boy's last name changed illegally, so I guess that's why the church did it. Years later, the ex stepson left the church and had his name changed back to what it was originally. Ex has gone on to have two more kids with her third husband.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2012 11:00AM by knotheadusc.

The kids are already BIC. They would have to cancel the first sealing which doesn't happen with name removal, and is very difficult to get.

My never-mo biological father did not agree to our being sealed to our dad (mum's second husband). The hold-out lasted for years. Our new Dad was a great guy, and he is the only father-figure I have. But our mother went totally under-hand - eventually she forged our first father's signature and had us legally adopted on the quiet. I doubt my second father knew what she had done (forging the signature).

The biological family never found out till I applied for a passport with my original birth certificate about 10 years later and nearly got into a lot of trouble. I was 9yo by the time they got married and we all got sealed, and was apparently adopted just before that. I had no idea I had been legally adopted, my mother let me use my original birth certificate for school and opening bank accounts and the like. She knew if she told us kids, we would tell our biological grandmother.

So keep an eye on things!

that regardless of how evil and apostate I become, I will always be sealed to her forever. She plays it like, "see, I won after all."

Just keep reminding her that her jerk god hates her so bad that he is going to separate her from you for eternity and that it is going to hurt her just as bad as it hurts you. Remind her that you just can't believe in a heavenly father that hates his children so much that he is only going to let a small percentage back into his presence.

Another example of strange sealing rules. My mother was sealed to my father in the temple. My siblings and I were BIC. My mother then divorces my father and years later she marries a never-mo. When they have a baby, my sibling is sealed to my mother and MY father because that sealing was never cancelled.

Where do they even come up with this craziness?

The rules were written back in the day that women were viewed as property. Keep that in mind, and it will make a lot of the church's policies, as well as their sexism, more clear.

Here is what a prophet had to say:

Joseph F. Smith stated in “Doctrines of Salvation” page 311. “Genealogies of Apostates Not to be Kept. In November 1832, the Lord said: “It is the duty of the Lords clerk, whom he has appointed, to keep a history and a general church record of all things that transpire in Zion, and of all those who consecrate properties, and receive inheritances legally from the bishop; And also their manner of life, their faith, and works; and also of the apostates who apostatize after receiving their inheritances.

It is contrary to the will and commandment of God that those who receive not their inheritance by consecration, agreeable to his law, which he has given, that he may tithe his people, to prepare them against the day of vengeance and burning, should have their names enrolled with the people of God. NEITHER IS THEIR GENEALOGY TO BE KEPT, OR TO BE HAD WHERE IT MAY BE FOUND ON ANY OF THE RECORDS OR HISTORY OF THE CHURCH. Their names shall not be found, neither the names of the fathers, nor the names of the children written in the book of the law of God, saith the Lord of Hosts.

Those who have received the truth and turned away from it and have rejected it and denied it shall be sorry. But I mention this in passing because people are coming constantly to have work done in the temples for people of this kind, in spite of all the Lord has said.”

Funny don’t ya think? Here it is in black and white and still opinions in the church are all over the place on this subject. Big flipping surprise huh? So here a prophet says “Thus saith the Lord” on the subject in a book that he wrote, edited and published specifically to set the record straight as attested to by all the “thus saith the lord” whose title is not “opinions about doctrine” but “Doctrines of Salvation”. By Flipping God this prophets published works on Doctrine is as Doctrinal as it gets and any breathing mormon that can say that this prophets “Doctrines” and “thus saith the Lords” don’t mean squat, then the whole of the religion falls. This is only one of thousands of examples of doctrine that is not doctrine or doctrine that torpedoes other doctrine. Yeah, we already know this.