Can a woman actually make it to the CK?'

[AdmiralHoldo]

I posted this on the FMH Facebook group. I'm curious to hear what my fellow heathens think.

For more than half of the existence of our church, women were placed under covenant to "obey the law of their husbands." Many of us, myself included, were placed under covenant to "hearken to our husbands," which according to President Nelson means "listen with the intent to obey."

I have never, NEVER listened to my husband with the intent to obey. Not even when I was orthodox. Not even when I 100% agree with what he is saying.

What about all those women who either promised, or had the promise made on their behalf, to OBEY? How many of those women actually obeyed their husbands? How many, like me, never even pretended to try?

Is it even possible for a woman to keep that covenant? If not, how can ANY woman get into the Celestial Kingdom? And where will the polygamy-necessitating surplus of women come from?

[Zeezrom]

I think it’s further proof the temple ceremony and doctrine of the celestial kingdom is all made up. Even when I was Mormon and at my most orthodox I never really attempted to keep the oath to dedicate everything I possessed or ever would possess for the building up of the kingdom of God on Earth i.e. the LDS church. So I guess by the temple covenant logic even the men including the Q15 won’t make it to the CK.

[2bizE]

I think the movie “The Truman Show” may have the answers.

[AdmiralHoldo]

I think the movie “The Truman Show” may have the answers.

Jog my memory, I haven't seen that in a while.

[wtfluff]

And where will the polygamy-necessitating surplus of women come from?

Just looking at birth rates, and doing some simple math blows that useless platitude out of the water. No obedience to husbands necessary.

[Zeezrom]

Not 100% sure of the meaning of the “Truman Show” reference. Truman dedicated his life to leaving the island only to find that he was trapped inside a man-made dome and everyone he knew was an actor on TV. His whole life had been a lie. In that sense it’s an apt metaphor for anyone growing up LDS.

[Hagoth]

This is a great topic, Admiral.

As a man I always kind of felt cheated that in the endowment (at least in my day) women were pronounced clean, but men told that they may become clean. So there's a helpful head start, maybe. Also, once upon a time, men were constantly reminded that if they are not worthy of their wife's obedience she will be taken from them and given to another. Eventually she will land, I assume, with a man who is such an awesomely worthy priesthood magnifying glass -you know, like Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, or Boyd K. Packer- that they will be effortlessly compelled to obey without a second thought.

So, I think the bigger question might be: can men, outside of a small exclusive club, actually make it into the CK?

I think the whole system is designed to ensure that many more women will be in the CK than men. That's why their preferred names for polygamy were celestial marriage and marriage for eternity. Of course, even though they are called "priestesses" those wives will really be more like adoring cheerleaders in their husband/god's harem, and eternal spirit-baby machines.

So now that the church tries to back away from the reason the whole temple endowment and marriage thing was created, they're still stuck with a pile of uncomfortable baggage that members have to wade through.

[Reuben]

So now that the church tries to back away from the reason the whole temple endowment and marriage thing was created, they're still stuck with a pile of uncomfortable baggage that members have to wade through.

Such as the word "hearken" I guess.

My wife and I have talked about this. She thinks of "hearken" more as listening with intent to understand than listening with intent to obey. I'm sure she picked up the idea from someone more progressive than President Nelson.

The church is always in the middle of a transition between old ideas and better ideas, regardless of how often its believers recognize that. All of the ideas, old and new, are active in the common discourse. It's easy to pick some mixture of old ideas (the baggage) and new ideas to demonstrate an inconsistency, but believers will usually pick relatively new ideas from the same common discourse that seem consistent to them. And then they'll wonder what we're all bitching about. Why can't we just pick ideas that demonstrate that the church is true and good?

Here, we have polygamy and celestial dynasties vs modern egalitarian marriage. Few disagree that the latter is better. The church has been moving toward it. That doesn't bother me. The fact that the church had such bass-ackwards and demeaning ideas and institutions to move away from bothers me. The fact that it moves so slowly bothers me more. What bothers me most, though, is the complete lack of acknowledgement that something changed or still needs to change. When people act like that, we call them arrogant and regard it as a deep flaw.

I'm left wondering what to do with this particular inconsistency besides bitching about it. I could do that all day. My wife isn't bothered, though. And if I know my children, they won't stand for anything less than modern egalitarian marriage - the church will have to have gotten there almost entirely within 10 years or risk losing them. (That, along with LGBTQ issues.) Can I set this one aside?

[alas]

Well, according to Brigham Young, all a woman had to do to make the CK was to give birth. I guess that proved she would make a good celestial breeding cow. (Did I just say that out loud?…I mean “celestial wife” of course)

But then all she required was for her husband to want her in his harem enough to call her new name and bring her into the CK. So, no righteousness doesn’t matter, just giving birth and being wanted by a qualifying man.

That is more disgusting than anything, so sure it was easier because women are pronounced clean and don’t have to become clean. Just be a willing cow.

It helps in understanding the modern endowment to understand what the church is changing the wording in order to hide. To figure that out, you have to understand what the original endowment was, and the beliefs of the man who authored the endowment ceremony. Joseph Smith never wrote down or finalized the ceremony, so Brigham wrote it and who knows how close it was to what Joseph did.

One thing they try to disguise is the idea that Jesus/Heavenly Father are not a woman’s “lord”. No, “lord” for her is her husband. So when they explain the veil ceremony, they say “the Lord” answers the knock with “what is wanted” and then at the end, “the Lord” takes the person through the veil. They explain it as if it is the same for men and women and then the women wonder why their husband is “standing proxy for the Lord”. Well, he isn’t standing proxy. He is her lord. In the same way that Jesus is the man’s Lord. So, someone is standing proxy for the man’s Lord, but if the woman gets her endowment just before or after she is married, it is her husband who takes her through the veil, and he is not standing proxy.

[Atlanticmike]

I posted this on the FMH Facebook group. I'm curious to hear what my fellow heathens think.

For more than half of the existence of our church, women were placed under covenant to "obey the law of their husbands." Many of us, myself included, were placed under covenant to "hearken to our husbands," which according to President Nelson means "listen with the intent to obey."

I have never, NEVER listened to my husband with the intent to obey. Not even when I was orthodox. Not even when I 100% agree with what he is saying.

What about all those women who either promised, or had the promise made on their behalf, to OBEY? How many of those women actually obeyed their husbands? How many, like me, never even pretended to try?

Is it even possible for a woman to keep that covenant? If not, how can ANY woman get into the Celestial Kingdom? And where will the polygamy-necessitating surplus of women come from?

If we die and find out that Mormonism is actually God's true gospel, I think will find out that women have equal authority with men. I often wonder if heavenly father and mother share responsibility in maintaining their worlds. Personally, I think there's a good chance the earth we live on is an "island of misfits" and heavenly mother told heavenly father that he had to deal with us because she was tired of all our bickering and judging one another. She's off taking care of other planets that our smarter brothers and sisters live on. Can you blame her!! We're a bunch A-holes, I wouldn't want to be in charge of us either.

[AdmiralHoldo]

My kids are A-holes sometimes too, but I wouldn't even think about cutting them out of my life! I wouldn't think Heavenly Mother would just leave us to Heavenly Father's devices - especially since She is well aware of what a jerk He is.

[Atlanticmike]

My kids are A-holes sometimes too, but I wouldn't even think about cutting them out of my life! I wouldn't think Heavenly Mother would just leave us to Heavenly Father's devices - especially since She is well aware of what a jerk He is.

If what I described is true, she's not cutting us out of her life, it's only 70 to 80 years here on earth, thats nothing compared to an eternity, right? Think of our mortal existence here more like a weekend trip to give our parents a break.
Dad's that are jerks make some of the best parents. Besides, if this whole mormon thing is true, who knows, maybe the rules we are governed by here on this planet might actually be more fair than other planets. We do have a lot of freedom to choose.
Imagine this, you die and go to the spirit world where not only are the spirit children of this world, but many other of gods worlds. You strike up a conversation with someone from a different planet and ask them about the planet they lived out their mortal experience and realize we have it really good here on our floating rock. They start explaining how on their planet, at the end of everyday they would be punished physically for all the sins they committed by a squad of avenging angels. That when they had sex it caused pain instead of pleasure. When they eat, food enters the stomach just long enough to have the nutrients absorbed then it's regurgitated violently. That church was six hours everyday no matter what. You feeling better now about life here on earth?
I'm a big believer that while here on earth we can put ourselves in hell mentally if we don't maintain a healthy thought process. Has nothing to do with Mormonism or any other religion or ethos. It comes down to exerting enough time an energy to become what makes you happy. Some choose to spend minimal time in constructing a life they would enjoy, settling for what ever they have. Sometimes that works out, but sometimes that means always being resentful. I think we're fortunate to have the freedom of thought.

[alas]

I think it more likely that Heavenly Mother would neglect us because we are doing fine. All the mothers I know of who neglected some children were focused on the child who was doing the worst and needed extra love and attention. For example, one guy I dated had a rebellions older brother and felt neglected because mom was always so worried about big brother getting arrested or killing himself somehow. Or my own mom who neglected my younger siblings because my oldest brother was in a hunting accident with brain damage and never was alright again, so she spent two-three years caring for him when he really needed 24/7 nursing care, but the insurance wouldn’t pay. Or several mothers I know with a disabled/autistic/sick/whatever child who needed much more care than the “normal”ones. So, *if* the Mormon theology is correct, I think Mom is off on some planet where things are really bad.

More likely, we have a more hands off God than Mormons want and they set the world up and just watch things happen and don’t intervene to change what the natural laws cause. They may comfort us, or communicate in different ways, but don’t control outcomes, like making the righteous rich, or protecting their favorites from harm. And there is nothing true about Mormonism.

[2bizE]

I think the movie “The Truman Show” may have the answers.

Jog my memory, I haven't seen that in a while.

Truman lives in a made-up world invented for a reality tv show. He is born on the show in the fake world. Eventually, he figures out his reality is fake and is able to leave.

[AdmiralHoldo]

I think the movie “The Truman Show” may have the answers.

Jog my memory, I haven't seen that in a while.

Truman lives in a made-up world invented for a reality tv show. He is born on the show in the fake world. Eventually, he figures out his reality is fake and is able to leave.

No, I remember what the movie was about, I just don't really see how it answers my original question - which is wondering if any woman has ever OBEYED her husband well enough to get into the Celestial Kingdom.

[2bizE]

What I am suggesting is that it doesn’t really matter because it is all made up anyway like the Truman Show.

[Angel]

women were placed under covenant to "obey the law of their husbands."...

Good thread - I would say No, Mormons do not teach that women reach the highest level of glory, it is taught that women will eternally be trapped in harems as slaves. I would interpret the doctrine as being "in the CK but not of it". Sounds more like a plan of hell than a plan of happiness for women.

Perhaps the women of the world need to create a new religion that teaches heaven will be a place where each woman has thousands of men at her beck and call to serve There are insect and animal colonies that follow a matriarchal hierarchy... of course the queen bee has to kill her competitors to stay in business (https://beekeepinglikeagirl.com/6-thing ... ueen-bees/). I suppose for the men still in the church, it would also be quite competitive to retain one's manlihood... horrible version of heaven for all involved.