Tags
democrats, divorce, eye roll, lds, mansplaining, priesthood, sealing, temple
I’ve mentioned here before that I periodically consider seeking an annulment for my temple sealing to my ex. I posed the question to a group of LDS single Democrats – if you’re divorced, did you had your sealing annulled? I provided further details – that we didn’t have kids, that my ex is excommunicated, that I wasn’t sure that I’d return to the temple but women cannot be sealed for time *and eternity* to more than one man. I considered saying in the initial question that this was directed to the women as this really isn’t an issue which impacts men. They can be sealed for eternity to multiple women. But I didn’t say as much. I figured this was known but I guess not.
Minutes later there was a response from a man who gave exactly the sort of answer one would expect from a TBM only worse. The gist of his response was I should keep the sealing intact because my ex might someday rejoin and deserved the blessings of being sealed. As for my saying I didn’t know if I’d ever return to the temple he was horrified, said I should consult with my priesthood leaders for guidance. I stated I didn’t need an intercessor for personal revelation. He insisted that isn’t what he meant and this is what the priesthood is there for. He said he’d pray for me.
Gosh, if only I had a penis!
I know a divorced woman who has chosen to remain sealed because of the perceived benefits for herself. I can respect that. Perhaps this TBM could have said something similar instead of making it all about my ex’d ex and priesthood leaders.
If I wasn’t already put off by this fella (and frankly, surprised he’s a Democrat), along came a woman who commented that this was not an appropriate place to discuss the temple. SERIOUSLY?! All that had been discussed was who can be sealed to whom. THAT’S IT. Both the mansplainer and I replied that there was plenty which could be discussed about the temple outside of its walls. She insisted it was not appropriate.
At this point, I was thinking FFS, if we can’t discuss issues unique to single LDS folks here, it’s no different than any other singles forum. I was half tempted to say something incredibly snarky that would really put her on edge about temple talk but instead, seeing this was clearly not the place for me, I said something about making a mistake expecting other LDS Democrats to be progressive about more than voting and left the group. Apparently others did as well and I heard the thread was deleted for “Driving away the Spirit.”
That surprises me as well that you got such an answer.
Actually, the follow-up question I would ask — based on the fact that you emphasize the difference for women — is whether this is partially with the idea of getting sealed to someone else, or whether it’s simply that you don’t want to be sealed to your ex.
If it’s the latter, then it’s definitely a question that would impact men as well as women. It is my understanding that a cancellation of sealing is granted almost exclusively for cases in which a woman would like to be sealed to a new partner. But if you have no new temple wedding on the horizon — and you simply want a cancellation because you’ve concluded that your ex is not someone you want to be sealed to — then is it even possible to get a cancellation?
Yes, I mentioned that as well, that I simply wanted the connection severed. But no, it rarely (if ever?) is granted if one is not getting remarried.
It’s possible but it depends on whether the priesthood powers in question think she ought to have one. We won’t get into how insulting THAT is.