Gramps,

Can youth or children enter the celestial room? Or why can’t they?

Danny

Answer

Danny,

The general answer is that only those who have received the temple endowment and hold a valid temple recommend may enter the celestial room. Since the endowment is typically received in adulthood, most youth and children do not enter that space. However, this is not about exclusion or spiritual inferiority—it is about the sacred order and purpose of temple worship.

To understand why, it helps to understand what the temple—and especially the celestial room—is meant to represent.

Temples are considered the “house of the Lord,” where individuals make covenants with God and receive sacred ordinances essential to salvation and exaltation. The Lord Himself declared:

“Organize yourselves; prepare every needful thing; and establish a house… a house of God.”
(Doctrine and Covenants 88:119)

This scripture emphasizes that the temple is not just a building—it is a place of preparation, learning, and spiritual refinement. That preparation is key to understanding why access to certain parts of the temple, including the celestial room, is structured the way it is.

President Russell M. Nelson taught:

“Spending more time in the temple builds faith. And your service and worship in the temple will help you to think celestial.” (Think Celestial, Oct. 2023)

The celestial room itself is not simply a peaceful place to sit. It is the symbolic culmination of the endowment ordinance—a sacred journey in which individuals receive instruction and make covenants with God. Entering the celestial room represents entering into God’s presence, echoing the ancient question found in scripture:

“Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? … He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart.”
(Psalm 24:3-4)

Because of this, access to the celestial room is directly tied to both ordinances and worthiness—not as a barrier, but as preparation to enter God’s presence in a sacred, covenantal way.

President Thomas S. Monson taught:

“The all-important and crowning blessings of membership in the Church are those blessings which we receive in the temples of God.”
(The Holy Temple—A Beacon to the World, Apr. 2011)

These “crowning blessings” include ordinances such as the endowment and sealing—experiences that typically occur later in a person’s spiritual journey, not during childhood or early youth.

There are two main reasons youth and children generally do not enter the celestial room.

First, temple ordinances are given in a specific, divinely established order. Youth begin by participating in baptisms and confirmations for the dead—sacred ordinances that allow them to actively participate in God’s work of salvation. Later, when they are prepared, they receive the endowment. The celestial room is part of that endowment experience, not separate from it.

This idea of progression is reflected in modern scripture:

“For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line… here a little and there a little.”
(2 Nephi 28:30)

God reveals truth and responsibility gradually, allowing individuals to grow in understanding and in covenant commitments.

Second, there is the principle of spiritual readiness and becoming. President Nelson taught:

“Time in the temple will help you to think celestial and to catch a vision of who you really are, who you can become, and the kind of life you can have forever.”
(Rejoice in the Gift of Priesthood Keys, Apr. 2024)

The endowment includes sacred covenants and symbolic teachings that require maturity, commitment, and life context. These are typically embraced in adulthood, often in preparation for missions or eternal marriage.

One of the most common misunderstandings is the idea that youth or children are somehow less worthy because they cannot enter the celestial room. Latter-day Saint doctrine strongly rejects this idea.

In fact, scripture affirms the spiritual condition of children:

“Little children are alive in Christ… they are whole.”
(Moroni 8:12)

Children are considered innocent before God and are not accountable for sin until the age of eight. Their not entering the celestial room is not about worthiness—it is about where they are in the covenant path.

Elder Quentin L. Cook quoted President Thomas S. Monson:

““There is no more important goal for you to work toward than being worthy to go to the temple.”
(See Yourself in the Temple, Apr. 2016)

Worthiness is not a barrier meant to exclude—it is preparation for something sacred.

It’s also important to recognize that youth are not on the outside of temple worship. They are deeply involved in one of its most meaningful aspects: baptisms for the dead.

This work connects to Paul’s teaching in the New Testament:

“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead…?”
(1 Corinthians 15:29)

Youth who participate in this ordinance are actively engaged in God’s work of salvation, helping provide saving ordinances for those who have passed on.

President Monson counseled youth:

“Always have the temple in your sights.”
(Church Media)

This invitation reframes everything—youth are not being kept from the celestial room; they are on the path toward it.

It can be helpful to see the temple as a journey of progression rather than a set of restrictions. Just as life unfolds in stages, so does participation in temple ordinances.

Elder Cook invited members to:

“See yourself in the temple.”
(See Yourself in the Temple, Apr. 2016)

For youth, that vision unfolds step by step. Today, they perform baptisms. In the future, they will receive their endowment. Eventually, they enter the celestial room and experience what it symbolizes.

And ultimately, that promise is tied to becoming like God. As modern revelation teaches:

“Then shall they be gods… because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting.”
(Doctrine and Covenants 132:20)

So, can youth or children enter the celestial room? Generally, no, not until they have received the endowment. But the reason is not exclusion or lack of worthiness.

Rather, it reflects a deeply held belief that God invites His children to grow line upon line, receiving sacred truths and making covenants when they are ready. The celestial room is not withheld—it is anticipated.

Youth are already on that path. They are participating in sacred work, feeling the Spirit, and preparing for the day when they, too, will enter the celestial room—not as visitors, but as covenant keepers ready to receive all that God has prepared for them.

Gramps

Gramps,

I had a question posed to me by a family member about money changers in the temple and Christ’s response, tipping tables, and such, but we still exchange money in the temple for clothes that the church could easily provide without exchanging money there. This does not affect my beliefs, but I don’t know how to answer this.

Jared

Answer

Jared,

On the surface, it can feel like a contradiction: in the New Testament, Jesus Christ forcefully drives out money changers from the temple, overturning tables and declaring, “Make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise” (John 2:16). Yet today, in temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, there are places where patrons can rent temple clothing, involving a small fee. So what’s going on here? Is this the same thing—or something meaningfully different?

To understand this, it helps to examine why Christ reacted so strongly in His day. The money changers and merchants in the ancient temple weren’t just providing a convenience. They had turned a sacred place into a marketplace, often exploiting worshippers in the process. Pilgrims traveling to Jerusalem needed animals for sacrifice and had to exchange their local currency into temple-approved coinage. This created an opportunity for price inflation, dishonesty, and distraction from the purpose of worship. What should have been a place of reverence and connection with God became noisy, commercialized, and, in some cases, corrupt.

Christ’s response wasn’t just about the presence of money—it was about misuse. The temple had been repurposed in a way that undermined its sacred function. His actions were a defense of holiness, not a blanket condemnation of all transactions connected to religious practice.

Fast forward to modern temples operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the situation is quite different in both purpose and spirit. The small exchanges that happen—for example, renting or purchasing temple clothing—aren’t about profit or commerce in the traditional sense. They’re logistical and practical, designed to support worship rather than distract from it.

For one thing, temples are not set up as marketplaces. You won’t find bargaining, advertising, or profit-driven sales floors. The distribution of clothing is quiet, minimal, and handled with reverence. In many cases, the fees involved are meant to cover basic costs like laundering, maintenance, or manufacturing—not to generate income. In fact, the Church heavily subsidizes temple operations overall. Temples are expensive to build and maintain, and they operate without charging admission or fees for ordinances, which are considered sacred and freely given.

There’s also an important principle at play in Latter-day Saint theology: the idea of consecration and participation. Members are often invited to contribute, whether through time, service, or resources, as a way of being spiritually invested in the work. Even small acts—like caring for temple clothing or contributing to its upkeep—can be seen as part of that broader pattern of shared responsibility. It’s not about “buying” access to sacred experiences, but about supporting the environment where those experiences happen.

That said, your question still touches on something real: why not just provide everything freely, with no exchange at all? It’s a fair point. And in many ways, the Church does strive to remove barriers. Individuals who cannot afford clothing or rent are not turned away; accommodations are made. The goal isn’t to exclude, but to ensure that the temple remains accessible while also being sustainably maintained.

Another key difference is intent and atmosphere. In Christ’s time, the temple courts had become crowded, noisy, and transactional to the point that their spiritual purpose was overpowered. In modern temples, every effort is made to preserve peace, order, and a sense of sacredness. The presence of a small logistical exchange doesn’t dominate the experience or redefine the space’s purpose. If anything, it’s intentionally kept in the background so worship remains central.

It might help to think of it this way: not all uses of money in a religious setting are equal. There’s a meaningful distinction between profiting from worship and facilitating worship. Christ condemned the former. Modern temple practices aim for the latter.

Still, questions like yours are valuable because they invite reflection. They push us to examine whether our practices align with our principles. And in a faith that places high importance on both scripture and continuing guidance, that kind of thoughtful engagement matters.

In the end, the heart of the issue comes back to what the temple is meant to be: a place set apart, focused on God, free from exploitation and distraction. Christ’s cleansing of the temple was a call to protect that sacred purpose. Modern practices, when done carefully and reverently, are intended to support—not undermine—that same goal.

If anything, your question echoes the same concern Christ had: keeping holy things truly holy. And that’s a question worth asking at any time and in any setting.

Gramps

]]> https://askgramps.org/is-paying-for-temple-clothing-the-same-as-money-changing-in-christs-time/feed/ 0 https://askgramps.org/why-do-we-have-prayer-rolls-in-the-temples/ https://askgramps.org/why-do-we-have-prayer-rolls-in-the-temples/#respond Wed, 04 Mar 2026 09:00:03 +0000 https://askgramps.org/?p=72223 Question

Gramps,

Why do we have prayer rolls in the temple?

Leonard

Answer

Leonard,

Gramps

Gramps,

Were temple ordinances such as endowments and sealings performed during the Book of Mormon time period?  I know that temples existed, but I wasn’t sure if the higher ordinances were performed at that time.

Thanks,

Julee

Answer

Julee,

The earliest scriptural temples, such as Solomon’s Temple described in the Old Testament, and the temples mentioned in the Book of Mormon, had unique features and functions. In 2 Nephi 5:16, Nephi recounts building a temple after the manner of the temple of Solomon, though not constructed of so many precious things owing to their scarcity in the new land. The scriptural description of Solomon’s Temple includes details such as the baptismal font on the back of 12 oxen (1 Kings 7:25), a pattern that echoes in modern temple symbolism and design.

But what took place in these ancient temples? Biblical and Book of Mormon records indicate that animal sacrifices and burnt offerings were core practices. These sacrifices symbolized Christ’s offering for humanity’s sins—a shadow of the atonement to come. Temples functioned as sacred spaces for worship, teaching, and ritual purification. However, the specific rituals and ordinances, such as those practiced in modern temples, are not explicitly detailed in the scriptures. Some speculate that the full nature of these ordinances may be covered in the sealed portions of scripture or lost in translation through centuries of scriptural transmission.

Importantly, the ancient rites most often recorded in scripture centered around communal covenant-making and offerings rather than personal or family-focused ordinances that dominate present-day temple practice. These ancient acts of faith laid the foundation for evolving temple worship but differed in important ways from later-revealed ordinances.

With the Restoration through the Prophet Joseph Smith, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints began to receive “line upon line, precept upon precept” regarding the temple and its ordinances. The concept of ordinances necessary for salvation—including the initiatory and endowment, baptisms for the dead, and sealings—emerged gradually throughout the early history of the Church.

Early temple ceremonies, particularly those in Kirtland and Nauvoo, reflected a sacred but evolving ritual structure. As Glen M. Leonard describes, many core elements of today’s initiatory ordinances originated in Kirtland in 1836. Building upon these, Joseph Smith revealed the “endowment,” a ceremony that introduced a narrative about man’s eternal journey, the making of covenants, and the reception of promised blessings. The endowment was initially administered to a select group—the anointed quorum—in secret before being more widely offered to Church members in the Nauvoo Temple after Smith’s death in 1844.

The endowment ceremony itself changed over time to accommodate practical realities: the Nauvoo endowment was vivid and memorable by design, taking about six hours to complete, and included dramatic techniques common in frontier America—acting, ritual clothing, movement between rooms, and narrative instruction. The first written script for the endowment would not appear until the dedication of the St. George Temple in 1877, and the ceremony continued to be refined in subsequent generations.

Additionally, key temple ordinances such as eternal marriage and proxy baptisms for the dead were introduced gradually. Initially, endowments and sealings were performed only for living members; it was not until 1877, in St. George, Utah, that proxy endowments began to be performed for deceased ancestors. Likewise, the sealing of couples beyond the grave and into the eternities was introduced by Joseph Smith and expanded in Nauvoo, becoming a central doctrine of eternal families within the Church.

The comparison between ancient biblical and Book of Mormon temples and today’s temple practices raises significant points of continuity and contrast:

1. Nature of Ordinances:

While ancient temples centered around sacrifice and providing a space for communal worship and instruction, modern temples in the Church are focused on ordinances designed for individual and family salvation and exaltation. As described by Milton V. Bachman Jr., the temple endowment is “to receive all those ordinances in the House of the Lord, which are necessary…to enable you to walk back to the presence of the Father, passing the angels who stand as sentinels, being enabled to give them the key words, the signs and tokens, pertaining to the Holy Priesthood, and gain your eternal exaltation.” This concept of instruction, covenant, and ritual is vastly more explicit and personalized in modern practice.

2. Sacrifice and Atonement:

Ancient temple rituals prominently featured altars for animal sacrifice, which served as a similitude of Christ’s atonement—a practice discontinued in modern temples, as Christ’s ultimate sacrifice rendered such offerings unnecessary. The focus thus shifts from typology and anticipation to ordinances that directly unite participants with Christ’s atonement through covenants and promises.

3. Evolution and Adaptation:

Modern temple ceremonies have evolved in response to changing doctrines, shifting needs, and a deepening understanding of eternal principles. For instance, the endowment ceremony once included an “oath of vengeance” that reflected historical circumstances and cultural context; this provision was later removed during the early 20th century as the Church emphasized integration and reconciliation. Such changes reflect an ongoing process of revelation and adaptation, rather than rigid adherence to a fixed script.

4. Sealing and Eternal Families:

The doctrine of eternal families—sealing spouses and children together into a chain across generations—was not part of ancient temple ordinances but is a distinctive hallmark of modern temple worship. The introduction of these ordinances marks a significant development in the understanding and practice of priesthood authority and the purpose of temple worship within the Church.

As Church President Russell M. Nelson and other leaders have often observed, the central purpose of temples remains unchanged: to bring individuals and families closer to Jesus Christ and the blessings of salvation and exaltation. What is required of each generation is faithfulness to revealed ordinances and openness to ongoing revelation. In this light, ancient and modern temple worship are united by a sacred quest—to prepare the children of God to return and dwell in His presence.

Gramps

Gramps,

My girlfriend, who is a recent convert, watched a video of the temple handshake near the veil. She is now confused and scared about being a member because she says it looks like Freemasonry. I don’t know how to explain the handshake without explaining the things taught in the temple which I know is sacred. I know Joseph Smith had some dealing with the Free Masons and that the ritual was created before them, but how can I put her mind at ease to understand that the handshake isn’t cultish or bad?

Andy

Answer

Andy,

The Latter-day Saint Temples and Masonic Temples have been compared since ancient times because they were from the same source.  And that was a proper and good source – the Lord.

Consider this: Is Judaism a cult?  Christianity (especially the LDS faith) shares a lot beliefs with Judaism as far as identifying the God we worship.  Are traditional Christians a cult?  We also share a lot of beliefs with Protestants.  Did we copy them?  No, we all found a similar source: The Bible.  And even from that original source, we have very different histories and differ quite a bit in our beliefs.

The temple ordinances were initiated shortly after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden.  Adam and Eve were given coats of skins (which we commemorate with the wearing of the garment of the Holy Priesthood) indicating that they received their temple ordinances.  These ordinances were handed down generation after generation.

What about the Masons?  They are NOT a cult.  That rumor really began when Jews began to join the organization. This stirred up a lot of anti-Semitism.  And it culminated with Hitler claiming that Masons were all Jews and wanted to dismantle the Masonic Temples in Germany.

They are a fraternal organization that is essentially a group of businessmen who wanted to create some charities.  The Shriners’ Hospitals are run/funded by the Masonic Order.

The idea of having “secret handshakes” were used by all sorts of organizations (both good and bad) throughout history.  This is just another organization that chose to do so.

Originally, the masonic order was a group of stone masons who were very proud of their craft.  So, they established an order (a guild) to ensure quality work.  When a mason from one city went to another city, they would have to prove their worth.  A quick way to do that was that if you were “raised” to various levels (apprentice, journeyman, master) you would learn a “secret handshake” for that level.  That handshake could be given to the master mason at the new city.  That let the master at that city know how good you were at the craft.  Eventually these guilds became so renowned that they had a level of political power.

In modern day, the Order is not just composed of stone masons, but a variety of successful businessmen who want to do some good with the blessing they’ve received from God.  They are like the Rotary or the Kiwanis.  The one religious requirement of all Masons is that they believe in some form of a Supreme Being and they are active in their religion whatever it may be.  The goal of Masonry is to make bad men good, good men better, and better men best.  A vast majority of them are Christian throughout the United States.

Where did they get their handshakes and “costumes” from?  If you go to their national website, they’ll tell you that they don’t know.  They “believe” their traditions are at least 1000 years old.  But they don’t have any written records really stating where they began.

A common theory among Masons is that they got it from Egyptian Pharaohs.  And either Abraham or Joseph (of Egypt) stole it from them.  We believe the reverse was true.  From the Book of Abraham, we read:

Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry; (Abraham 1:27)

In other words, the early Pharaohs were righteous men of the earth who wanted to imitate the true faith.  This included copying temple ordinances.  But because it could not be run with revelation through a true prophet, it was a corrupt religion.

Here, we learn that even in ancient times it was impossible to truly keep sacred things secret.  Just as they did in ancient times, there were certain individuals who put together a presentation (like the video that your GF saw) to spill secrets.  And no doubt, the video she saw was done to make it seem as “spooky” as possible.

We believe Pharaoh stole the ceremony from the True Faith of the Lord.  But Masons say that Abraham stole it from the Pharaohs and it ultimately became a basis for the Jewish religion.  Which story is true?  We have scriptures that say we’re correct.  They have an origin story lost to history.

So, it wasn’t that we stole the ordinances from the Masons in modern times (nor they, us).  It was that the source material was copied in ancient times and continued through parallel paths.

Here is some evidence from Church History that Joseph didn’t copy the Masons.

• At the time that the 8 witnesses saw the golden plates, Joseph Sr. was a mason.  He went home and described the plates to his wife, Lucy Mack.  He remarked that the front plate (a cover sheet) had the masonic symbols of the compass and the square.  This was about 10+ years before Joseph Jr. even thought about becoming a mason.
• Joseph described the Urim and Thummim as having the compass and square symbols on the stones.  Oliver (the only other person allowed to view them) confirmed this.
• There was much more to the Temple Ceremony.  Joseph said that they didn’t have the proper facilities to do it correctly.  And it is those aspects that are very important to our understanding of our covenants.  Yet the Masons didn’t have any problems with their ceremonies.  That’s because (even with some similarities) the Masons do a completely different ceremony.

The symbols of the compass and the square are very ancient.  Ancient Jews had them.  Egyptians had them.  Now we (and the Masons) have them.  And both the Masons and Latter-day Saints have been maligned because of it.  But neither of us stole the symbols from the other.  We inherited them through independent lines.

Also see a previous article: Freemason’s handshake

 Gramps

Gramps,

What did Elijah restore in the Kirtland temple?

Bill

Answer

Bill,

Constructed between 1833 and 1836, the Kirtland Temple was the first temple built by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Unlike other meetinghouses, a temple is regarded as a sacred space where significant ordinances are performed, and divine revelations are received. The dedication of the Kirtland Temple marked a watershed moment for the early Saints, establishing a central location for spiritual instruction and community gatherings.

The Temple became the focal point for doctrinal revelations that expanded and clarified the Church’s mission and organization. Among these revelations was the momentous visit by Elijah, a prophet from the Old Testament, whose appearance solidified the Church’s authority to perform celestial ordinances.

Sealing ordinances are sacred ceremonies that bind family relationships beyond mortal life, ensuring that loved ones remain connected in the afterlife. Before Elijah’s restoration, these key ordinances were not available, limiting the Church’s capacity to perform essential work for its members. By restoring the sealing keys, Elijah empowered the Church to fulfill its divine mandate to facilitate eternal progression for its members.

The restoration of the sealing keys also extends to the broader mission of the Church. By enabling eternal marriages and family relationships, the Church fosters a sense of continuity and purpose among its members. This doctrine encourages individuals to live righteously, knowing that their relationships and efforts extend beyond this life.

Moreover, the sealing ordinances are integral to other crucial temple work, such as proxy baptisms for the dead. This practice allows deceased individuals the opportunity to accept the gospel in the afterlife, further emphasizing the Church’s dedication to universal salvation and eternal progression.

Commemorations often include educational programs, devotional services, and historical retrospectives that highlight the enduring impact of Elijah’s restoration. These observances not only honor past events but also inspire current and future generations to uphold the principles established through these sacred ordinances.

Gramps

Gramps,

Hi. Thank you for taking the time to answer questions.

I received my endowment a year ago and also received my name. But ever since that time, I have been wondering why we received a new name and does the name mean something. What is the purpose behind it? Hope you can help me understand.

May-Elin

Answer

May-Elin,

Receiving a new name during the temple endowment is a transformative experience that signifies the beginning of a new spiritual journey. It reflects the inherent belief within Latter-day Saint doctrine that through Jesus Christ, individuals can experience rebirth and renewal. Members who participate in this sacred ordinance take upon themselves a new identity—one that reflects their commitment to follow Christ and align their lives with His teachings.

According to Hugh Nibley, a prominent scholar in Latter-day Saint theology, the new name represents “a new identity in Christ” and emphasizes the transformative power of the temple ordinances. In the temple, members are reminded of their divine potential and the significance of their covenant relationship with God, reinforcing the idea that the temple is a sacred space for personal growth and spiritual enlightenment.

Gramps

Gramps,

Why is the Law of Chastity included as a separate law during the endowment, instead of as part of the Law of Obedience like other commandments? Of course, chastity is incredibly important, but I’ve always been confused by its singular emphasis in the endowment. Why not include other commandments as separate laws, such as no murder or no lying? What makes chastity different?

Justin

Answer

Justin,

The Law of Chastity holds a profound significance within the doctrines and practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This sacred law, which advocates for sexual purity before marriage and fidelity within marriage, is not merely a guideline but a covenant made between individuals and God. Its inclusion as a separate law during the endowment ceremony highlights its foundational role in the spiritual journey of Church members.

The Law of Chastity, as defined by Church doctrine, entails complete abstinence from sexual relations before marriage and absolute fidelity after marriage. It emphasizes that sexual relations are a divine gift, intended to be shared exclusively between a husband and wife within the sanctity of marriage. This law is deeply rooted in the belief that sexuality is sacred and should be treated with respect and reverence.

According to Church leaders, including Elder David A. Bednar, the law is seen as a way to protect individuals from the emotional and spiritual consequences that often accompany sexual immorality. The teachings underscore that the ability to procreate is a sacred power, and engaging in sexual relations outside marriage undermines this divine purpose (source: Third Hour).

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland has emphasized that the body is an integral part of the soul and that sexual sin is a serious transgression that affects both the body and spirit. The endowment ceremony serves as a reminder of the sacred nature of sexual relations and the importance of maintaining purity as a covenant with God.

Moreover, the doctrine emphasizes that all sexual sins, regardless of their nature, can have profound effects on an individual’s spiritual standing. The Church teaches that the road to repentance includes recognizing the gravity of one’s actions and making a sincere effort to change (source: Ask Gramps).

To counteract these cultural pressures, Church members are encouraged to engage in open discussions about chastity, educate themselves about the importance of sexual purity, and seek support from their communities. Teaching children about the Law of Chastity candidly and respectfully is viewed as a crucial step in helping them navigate the challenges of modern society.

President Gordon B. Hinckley taught that individuals must take charge of their sexual impulses and strive to channel their energies into righteous pursuits. This principle of self-control is essential for maintaining purity and integrity in one’s life (source: Ask Gramps).

Gramps

Gramps,

Can we share personal revelation or insights that we might receive while in the temple with others?

Mike

Answer

Mike,

The temple serves as a unique environment conducive to spiritual experiences and personal revelation. Within its sacred walls, members engage in prayer, reflection, and communion with God, seeking divine guidance tailored to their individual circumstances. Personal revelations are often characterized as sacred moments of clarity, understanding, or direction that individuals feel prompted to follow.

Members are encouraged to approach these experiences with humility and reverence. The temple is not just a place for ordinances but a sanctuary for personal communion with the divine. President Gordon B. Hinckley, a former leader of the Church, emphasized the importance of personal revelation when he stated, “There is nothing that can take the place of personal revelation” (Hinckley, 1999). This highlights the belief that personal experiences of revelation are essential to individual spiritual growth.

The Sacredness of Personal Revelation

Personal revelations received in the temple are viewed as sacred experiences that should be treated with utmost respect. Church leaders frequently remind members that these insights are deeply personal and may not always be appropriate for public sharing. The sanctity of these revelations stems from their intimate nature; they are moments when individuals feel a clear connection with God and receive guidance meant specifically for them.

Members are taught that not all revelations are intended for dissemination. Sharing these experiences can sometimes lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations, diluting the personal significance they hold. Thus, it is vital to consider the audience and context before sharing. As Elder Richard G. Scott stated, “When we are in harmony with the Lord, we receive personal revelation that is right for us. It is not wise to share it with others unless we are prompted to do so” (Scott, 2010).

Guidelines for Thoughtful Sharing of Personal Revelation

While sharing personal revelations can be uplifting and inspiring, members are encouraged to do so in a manner that honors their sacred nature. Here are some guidelines for sharing experiences of personal revelation thoughtfully:

1. Consider the Audience: Before sharing, reflect on who will be receiving the revelation. It is essential to ensure that the person or group is open to such discussions and can appreciate the significance of the experience.

2. Respect the Sacredness: Approach the sharing of personal revelations with the understanding that these insights are sacred. This means being mindful of the language used and the depth of detail shared. Avoiding overly casual conversations about deeply spiritual experiences helps maintain their sanctity.

3. Seek Guidance from Church Leaders: If unsure about sharing a personal revelation, it is advisable to seek counsel from Church leaders. They can provide guidance on how to approach the sharing of personal experiences in a way that aligns with the principles of the Church.

4. Focus on Uplifting Others: When sharing, ensure that the experience shared is meant to uplift and inspire others. Personal revelations should serve to strengthen the faith of listeners and encourage them in their spiritual journeys.

5. Be Prepared for Diverse Reactions: Understand that others may react differently to personal revelations. Some may be inspired, while others might not resonate with the experience. Being prepared for a range of responses can help manage expectations and facilitate respectful conversations.

By adhering to these guidelines, members can navigate the delicate balance between sharing personal revelations and respecting their sacred nature. The act of sharing should be motivated by a desire to uplift and inspire others while maintaining the privacy and sanctity of personal spiritual experiences.

Conclusion

Personal revelation received in the temple holds a unique and sacred place within the spiritual lives of members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. These experiences are not only pivotal for personal guidance but also serve as profound testimonies of faith. While there is value in sharing these revelations, it is crucial to do so thoughtfully and respectfully, honoring their sacred nature and the personal journey they represent. As members navigate the decision to share their experiences, they are encouraged to reflect on the impact their words may have on others and to seek guidance when needed. Ultimately, the temple remains a place where individuals can receive divine guidance, and the sharing of that guidance can strengthen not only the individual but also the community of faith.

Gramps

Gramps,

My husband and son passed away within 6 months of each other.  My husband’s half-sister (same mother),  is an avid LDS  member.  She wants to seal and baptize both in the LDS faith.  I have enjoined her and the LDS from this act in perpetuity, by writing letters. What else can I do to prevent these acts from taking place?  What assurance do I have that my requests will be followed?

Iris

Answer

Dear Iris,

I’m sorry to hear about your double loss and offer my condolences. You have some options available to you in preventing posthumous ordinance work for loved ones. I’ll get to that, but I’d like to help you understand where your half-sister-in-law is coming from and hopefully also acknowledge your grief and concern in this matter.

Honoring the Dead

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches the immortality of the human soul and the precious gift of agency. Latter-day Saints take seriously the claim that an individual’s personhood continues even after death. A person still feels, thinks, hopes, wills, and desires. They still maintain friendships and recognize loved ones who have also passed on. And, through the power of Christ’s Atonement, they will one day be judged by Him and resurrected.

Latter-day Saints also take seriously the claim that God has given us agency whereby we may act out our feelings, thoughts, hopes, will, and desires. God honors a person’s choice to voluntarily enter His kingdom through baptism, or to refuse it. He also honors when a person changes their mind, reverses their position, and opts instead to deny their baptism or to finally receive it. As one of our hymns states, “God will force no man to heaven.”

Uniting these doctrines is the practice of baptism for the dead and other temple ordinances like sealing families together. If a person really believes that these ordinances have efficacy, they will naturally want to extend them to those they love. If there is no such offer you may begin to wonder whether they actually love their dead or if they really don’t believe these doctrines after all. It’s akin to Christians who believe in a literal hell and a requirement of true belief to escape it. They may witness to us imperfectly but we can see when it comes from a place of love (and may even worry about our relationship if that witnessing ever stops).

When your brother’s half-sister requests her desire to have your husband and son baptized she is expressing her love for them and wishes to honor them. She recognizes that your son and your husband still exist and have being, and that their bodies are only temporarily separated from them. She is also aware that they may not wish to be baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Performing this ordinance extends the offer to the deceased, but it does not compel them to accept. It is a statement of her faith and love, and is not efficacious without your husband’s or your son’s faith — the current faith they now have today.

Honoring the Living

The Church recognizes that not everyone sees such things the way we do. We recognize the grief and mourning that comes with death. We recognize the desire to hold dear the memory of our departed dead as they were. We also recognize that we are not the only ones who love, mourn, and miss those who have passed on.

In the past, we have perhaps been too indiscriminate in honoring the dead without considering the feelings of their close relatives. Children of holocaust victims expressed “hurt” that loved ones were posthumously baptized Christians when they “were killed as Jews in Auschwitz.” In a spirit of reconciliation, the Church met with Jewish representatives and subsequently updated the databases and other software we use to track temple ordinances. Before requesting a proxy ordinance on someone who has died within living memory (110 years) the Latter-day Saint must affirm that they are close kin or have obtained permission from close kin. This policy continues to be reaffirmed every few years.

It is the frequent experience of many members of the Church who have participated in this work that they have grown closer to living relatives whom they would not have known otherwise. In learning about common ancestors they also discover common interests and experiences that they otherwise would not have known. And with relatives they already know they often learn more about the qualities, traits, and attributes that make their common dead so loved and well-remembered. This work can bring families members — even ones who believe differently — closer together.

Next Steps

I would encourage you to have more conversations with your husband’s half-sister. Ask her to explain to you why she wants to perform these ordinances and what it would mean to her. Take this opportunity to also explain to her why you do not want these ordinances performed. You should both seek understanding and the ability to explain the other’s motivations.

In addition to this, take the time to familiarize yourself with the Church’s policy for who qualifies as near-kin for ordinance approval.

Deceased persons who were age 8 or older at the time of their death may have proxy ordinances performed on their behalf. Except as noted in 28.3, proxy ordinances may be performed for all deceased persons as soon as 30 days have passed from their date of death if either of the following applies:

 

– A close relative of the deceased (undivorced spouse, adult child, parent, or sibling) submits the name for temple ordinances.

 

– Permission to perform the ordinances is received from a close relative of the deceased (undivorced spouse, adult child, parent, or sibling).

 

If neither of the above conditions applies, proxy temple ordinances may be performed 110 years after the deceased person was born.

If your son died single and childless then you are the living gatekeeper for his ordinances (if he was an only child — if he has a sibling then he or she can weigh in after reaching adulthood). Rather than hoping that this policy is followed, you can take a more active role by signing up for a FamilySearch account. You can try searching for your son’s name and death date to see if there’s already a record for him. If there isn’t, you may wish to add one so you can do the next step: under “Collaborate” add a note for other researchers to let them know that you are a close relative and you do not give your permission for the baptism to be performed. This note will also show up on the “Details” tab. You may want to ask your husband’s half-sister to help you navigate FamilySearch so you can do this.

For any additional steps that you can take, reach out to FamilySearch’s support team.

Now, I mentioned that for your son you are likely the sole near-kin. That is not the case for your husband. He has other family who also miss him and want to honor him. I hope for the sake of your husband’s memory and the love that his families have for him that you and his half-sister can come to an agreement on how to move forward.

Gramps

Gramps,

In the temple what is the difference between women being pronounced clean and that men may become clean?

Russell

Answer

Russell,

This is one of the great inequities of being born a man on this earth.  Men have a greater burden to bear in order to be worthy before the Lord.

That said, I think it’s important to point out that your question contains an incomplete statement.  It is to become clean from the blood of this generation.

Those who bear the priesthood are required to spend their time, talents, and means to push back against the sin & decay of each generation.  That is part of what the priesthood is for.  Women bear no such responsibility.  They only need to worry about their own sins, not the sins of others.

President Nelson said in a recent Conference:

Today I reaffirm strongly that the Lord has asked every worthy, able young man to prepare for and serve a mission. For Latter-day Saint young men, missionary service is a priesthood responsibility. You young men have been reserved for this time when the promised gathering of Israel is taking place. As you serve missions, you play a pivotal role in this unprecedented event!

 

For you young and able sisters, a mission is also a powerful, but optional, opportunity. Preaching the Gospel of Peace

Men and women both have many traits that are unique to their sexes.  Some traits give us various strengths.  But with those strengths come various responsibilities.

 Gramps

Gramps,

I have a wife who attends church to support me. She has a huge issue about millions of dollars being spent on the building of each new temple in light that this money could feed and care for so many. Why does the Mormon church feel the necessity to put so much money into building each temple, rather than more modest costs and facilities to accomplish the same thing?

David

Answer

David,

This is a very common question both in and out of the Church, and there are two answers that help explain the matter.

First of all, regarding helping the needy, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints already has a very extensive welfare system in place and operating strictly on donated funds from the membership. The money to run these facilities and to supply them comes mainly from the fast offerings that are donated once a month by the membership of the Church worldwide. However there are other sources of donated funds outside the Church, from individual non-members to larger organizations that wish to help keep the program running as well as possible.

The welfare system is also the main source of supplies when the Church responds to emergency relief efforts nationwide and worldwide. In those cases, the financial and commercial assets that the church holds contribute to the monetary needs of these responses, as well as amazing donations of goods and supplies from people around the world.

In other words, whenever the Church can donate and serve the poor and needy, the resources are in place and ready to do so as promptly as possible, whatever the need, great or small.

On a slightly different angle, The Church of Jesus Christ has always taught the principle of charity in the individual. In other words, we believe in being good neighbors. We have always been encouraged to lift up the heavy hearts, to care for the needy through our own individual and family efforts. We have been glad to donate to worthy charities, homeless shelters, food banks, and so on.

In that regard we make an attempt at preventing the more widespread and large scale relief efforts by trying to do a little here and there every day.

Now about the temples.

In order to understand why we spend so much on the temples, it helps to understand what they’re for in the first place. In the Bible, the temple of Solomon was built using the finest materials and craftsmanship available at the time. Remember the temple was a structure that was to be built for one purpose alone, and that was to provide a place for men to directly approach their God in faith. As such, it was a different type of building than the synagogues of a later day, which were intended and used for regular worship and edification.

The temple stood apart as a sacred building dedicated to the glory and holiness of the LORD. As it was then, so it is today.

The Church has regular meetinghouses for Sunday worship and other congregational needs. Typically they are well-built facilities, but they aren’t any different looking than many other churches you can find.

The temples we build today, however, are special buildings devoted to sacred ordinances for the exaltation of mankind. Above every entrance to every temple are the words “Holiness to the LORD”. The temples are not open to the public at large, as our meetinghouses are. Instead members must meet specific standards of obedience to be able to enter the temple and participate in the ordinances performed there.

Temples are not places we gather at weekly. In fact the temples are closed on Sundays so the volunteers who operate them can attend their weekly meetings at the meetinghouses. Going to the temple is a special event, and some members can only attend the ordinances there once in their lives. Others can do so on a monthly basis if they so choose.

The temple is the most sacred place on earth to The Church of Jesus Christ. Because these buildings are so special and so sacred, we build them out of the best materials we can, just as Solomon was commanded to do in building the temple found in the Old Testament.

To be sure, not all our temples are grand and large buildings. Many of the newer ones made are about the size of our meetinghouses if not a little smaller, and they are only open on a part-time basis. In that respect we save some funds in not building a large temple where one would not necessarily be fully used.

Gramps