Gramps,

What does it mean to be from the tribe of Naphtali? What are my responsibilities and duties?

Clyn

Answer

Clyn,

In Latter-day Saint (LDS) theology, discovering through a patriarchal blessing that you belong to the tribe of Naphtali can feel both meaningful and a little unclear at first. What does that identity actually mean? Does it come with specific duties? And how should it shape the way you live your life?

To understand this, it helps to begin with a foundational truth: in LDS doctrine, belonging to a tribe of Israel is primarily about covenant identity rather than strict biological lineage. While some individuals may be literal descendants, many are adopted into the house of Israel as they accept the gospel of Jesus Christ and enter into sacred covenants. This means your tribal identity is less about ancestry and more about your role in God’s ongoing work.

President Russell M. Nelson taught that one of the meanings of the word Israel is “let God prevail” (Let God Prevail, General Conference, Oct. 2020). Seen this way, being part of any tribe—including Naphtali—means choosing to let God guide your life. Your lineage becomes a reminder of who you are spiritually and of whose work you are part.

Naphtali itself is one of the twelve tribes of Israel, descended from Jacob’s son. In Genesis 49:21, Naphtali is described as “a hind let loose: he giveth goodly words.” This poetic imagery suggests qualities such as freedom, swiftness, and the ability to speak uplifting or inspired words. In Deuteronomy 33:23, Naphtali is described as being “satisfied with favour, and full with the blessing of the Lord.” While the Church has not given an official list of traits or assignments tied to each tribe, these scriptural descriptions can offer meaningful insight.

If your lineage is Naphtali, you might find that your influence often comes through communication—encouraging others, sharing truth, or helping people feel the Lord’s love. But it’s important not to overgeneralize. Your patriarchal blessing is personal scripture, and it will give more specific direction than any general description of a tribe ever could.

When it comes to responsibilities, the most important thing to understand is this: your core duties are the same as those of any member of the house of Israel. Tribal identity does not create separate assignments—it connects you to a shared covenant mission.

Central to that mission is the gathering of Israel.

President Russell M. Nelson has taught, “Now, participating in the gathering of Israel will require some sacrifice on your part. It may even require some changes in your life. It will definitely take some of your time and energy and your God-given talents.” (Hope of Israel, Worldwide Devotional, June 2018).

Importantly, this work is not limited to formal missionary service. President Nelson also explained, “Anytime you do anything that helps anyone… make and keep their covenants… you are helping to gather Israel” (Hope of Israel teaching excerpt). That means simple, everyday actions matter. A kind word, a testimony shared, or quiet encouragement can all be part of this sacred work.

For someone from Naphtali, that idea connects in a particularly meaningful way. If your tribe is symbolically associated with “goodly words,” then your role in gathering Israel may often come through how you speak, uplift, and communicate truth. Your voice—whether in conversation, teaching, writing, or quiet reassurance—can be a powerful instrument in the Lord’s hands.

But gathering Israel is only part of your responsibility. Equally important is how you live your own life. Being part of Israel means striving to keep your covenants, follow Jesus Christ, and seek the companionship of the Holy Ghost. Your lineage does not guarantee spiritual strength—it invites you to develop it.

President Nelson also emphasized the personal nature of this calling when he said, “You were sent to earth at this precise time… to help gather Israel” (Hope of Israel devotional). This adds another layer of meaning to your identity. You are not just labeled as part of Naphtali—you are placed here with purpose, at a specific time, to contribute to God’s work.

This perspective helps shift the focus from “What does my tribe say about me?” to “How is God inviting me to act?” Your lineage supports your mission, but it does not limit it.

Another important aspect of your duty is to bless others. The Abrahamic covenant promises that through the house of Israel, “all the families of the earth” will be blessed. That means your life is meant to have an outward impact. Whether through service, kindness, teaching, or example, you are part of a larger effort to lift and strengthen those around you.

Again, for someone from Naphtali, this may naturally align with uplifting and strengthening others through words and presence. But these expressions will be unique to you. The Spirit will guide how your gifts are used.

Ultimately, your patriarchal blessing is your best guide. It is a personal revelation tailored to your life. While understanding your tribe can provide helpful context, your blessing will clarify your specific responsibilities, promises, and potential. Returning to it often can deepen your understanding over time.

In the end, being from the tribe of Naphtali is not about fitting into a predefined mold. It is about being part of the covenant family of Israel and participating in God’s work on the earth. It is a reminder that you are known, called, and needed.

And your responsibilities? They are both simple and profound: let God prevail in your life, keep your covenants, bless others, and help gather Israel—one person, one conversation, one faithful act at a time.

Gramps

]]> https://askgramps.org/what-does-mean-to-be-from-tribe-of-naphtali/feed/ 0 https://askgramps.org/did-we-have-an-extended-heavenly-family/ https://askgramps.org/did-we-have-an-extended-heavenly-family/#respond Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:00:26 +0000 https://askgramps.org/?p=73409 Question

Dear Gramps,

Assuming the widely held assumption that Heavenly Father was once a man like us, with a Heavenly Father of his own, does that mean that we have an extended celestial spirit family? For example, do we have heavenly grandparents, uncles, aunts, and so on?

Many Thanks,

Gabriel

Answer

Gabriel,

That’s actually a really fun—and surprisingly deep—question: Do we have heavenly grandparents, uncles, and aunts according to Latter-day Saint (LDS) theology? Short answer? The doctrine doesn’t spell it out directly… but there are some pretty strong clues that point in a really interesting direction.

In the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, one of the core beliefs is that we are all spirit children of Heavenly Parents—meaning a Heavenly Father and, though less discussed, a Heavenly Mother. That idea alone is already pretty profound: God isn’t just a distant creator—He’s literally our Father. According to Latter-day Saint belief, we lived with Him before coming to earth as part of a premortal life. That framework sets the stage for how members of the Church understand their identity and purpose.

Once you accept that God is truly our Father, it naturally leads to a follow-up question that feels almost unavoidable: if He is our Father, does He have parents too? This is where things move from clearly defined doctrine into more thoughtful consideration.

A key teaching in LDS theology is something often called eternal progression. This idea suggests that God Himself became who He is through a process of growth and progression. One of the most well-known statements connected to this belief comes from Lorenzo Snow, who taught, “As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be.” That statement has been discussed and reflected on for generations because of what it seems to imply. If God the Father once experienced a form of progression, then it raises the possibility that He may have had a Father as well.

If that’s the case, then the idea of heavenly grandparents starts to feel less like a strange question and more like a reasonable extension of that belief. And if there are heavenly grandparents, then logically, it wouldn’t be a stretch to wonder about an extended heavenly family—uncles, aunts, and perhaps even more relationships that mirror what we experience here on earth.

At the same time, it’s really important to be clear about what has and hasn’t been officially revealed. While this line of thinking is consistent with certain teachings and statements, there is no formal doctrine from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that outlines a detailed heavenly family tree beyond our Heavenly Parents. You won’t find an official teaching that specifically confirms the existence of heavenly grandparents or extended relatives.

That doesn’t mean the idea is wrong—it just means it hasn’t been fully revealed. In Latter-day Saint belief, not everything about the eternities has yet been made known. There’s an understanding that some truths will come “line upon line” over time, rather than all at once.

What has been emphasized very clearly is our relationship with our Heavenly Father. He is the one we pray to, the one who is directly involved in our lives, and the one whose plan we are actively a part of. The focus stays there because that relationship is the most immediately relevant and meaningful to us.

Even so, considering the possibility of a larger heavenly family can deepen our view of eternal relationships. One of the central themes in LDS theology is that families are not meant to be temporary. Through sacred ordinances performed in temples, family relationships can continue beyond this life. That belief alone suggests that relationships are far more enduring and expansive than we often realize.

So when people wonder about heavenly grandparents or extended family, they’re really tapping into a bigger truth: that family is central to God’s plan and that those connections don’t simply end at death. Instead, they continue, grow, and take on greater meaning in eternity.

The most grounded way to answer the question is probably this: we know we have Heavenly Parents, and that truth is foundational. The idea of heavenly grandparents, uncles, and aunts is possible and even consistent with certain teachings, but it hasn’t been clearly defined or confirmed as official doctrine. It sits in that space where thoughtful belief and revealed truth meet, without being fully spelled out.

Rather than trying to map out every detail of heaven’s structure, Latter-day Saint teachings tend to guide us toward what matters most right now—our relationship with God and the way we build and strengthen our families here on earth. Those relationships are seen as preparation for something much bigger and more lasting.

There’s also something meaningful about not having every answer. The possibility that heaven includes generations beyond our full comprehension adds a sense of depth and wonder. It reminds us that God’s plan is broader and more expansive than we currently see.

So while we can’t say with certainty that there are heavenly uncles or grandparents, the bigger takeaway is actually more personal and more powerful: you are part of a divine family. You have a Father in Heaven who knows you, cares about you, and has a plan for you. And whatever the full structure of that heavenly family looks like, it’s safe to say it’s more connected, more loving, and more complete than anything we experience here.

Gramps

Dear Gramps,

Is it possible for Jesus to actually appear to me as a child?  I remember being upset, and then I believe I actually saw Him.  I then felt an ease come over me and turned, falling asleep.  I was not sleeping before this.  Thank you very much.

Donna

Answer

Donna,

That’s a really tender and meaningful question—and honestly, it’s one a lot of people have quietly wondered about at some point. When we talk about the possibility of seeing Jesus Christ, especially as a child, it touches on some deep ideas in Latter-day Saint theology about revelation, spiritual experiences, and how the Lord interacts with His children.

From an LDS doctrinal perspective, the short answer is: yes, it is possible—but it’s also very rare, and maybe not in the way people sometimes imagine.

In scripture, there are recorded instances of individuals, including young people, seeing the Savior. One of the most well-known examples in our faith is Joseph Smith, who, as a 14-year-old boy, experienced the First Vision (Joseph Smith—History 1:5–20). While that vision included both God the Father and Jesus Christ, it establishes an important doctrinal truth: the Lord can reveal Himself to anyone He chooses, regardless of age.

There’s also the account in 3 Nephi 11 and 17, where Jesus appears to the Nephites and invites little children to come unto Him. He blesses them individually, and angels minister to them. That moment reinforces something beautiful—children are not spiritually overlooked; they are central to the Savior’s love.

Now, here’s where we gently ground things.

While these kinds of direct, open visions do happen, they are not the norm—even for very faithful people. Most leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have taught that the vast majority of our interactions with the Savior come through the Holy Ghost rather than physical appearances.

President Boyd K. Packer taught this principle very clearly:

“The Spirit does not get our attention by shouting or shaking us with a heavy hand. Rather it whispers… The voice of the Spirit is described in the scriptures as being neither ‘loud’ nor ‘harsh’… but rather a still and small voice.”  (Boyd K. Packer, “The Candle of the Lord,” Ensign, Jan. 1983)

That teaching is key. It helps us understand that most spiritual experiences—especially for children—are quiet, personal, and easy to overlook if we’re expecting something dramatic.

That doesn’t make them any less real.

In fact, President Packer also emphasized that we shouldn’t expect constant or dramatic manifestations:

“Some answers will come from reading the scriptures, some from hearing speakers. And, occasionally… some will come by very direct and powerful inspiration. The promptings will be clear and unmistakable.” (Boyd K. Packer, “Personal Revelation: The Gift, the Test, and the Promise,” Ensign, Nov. 1994)

So yes, powerful experiences can happen—but they are occasional, not the standard pattern.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks also gave really helpful guidance about this. He cautioned against seeking dramatic manifestations as a goal:

“We should not seek to compel the Lord to give us revelations by the way we live… We should not expect or seek for visions or angels… In most cases, revelation comes in small and simple ways.” (Dallin H. Oaks, “Teaching and Learning by the Spirit,” Ensign, Mar. 1997)

That’s an important balance. It’s not that visions never happen—it’s that they are given according to God’s purposes, not as something we pursue as a sign of faith or worthiness.

Now, when it comes specifically to children, LDS doctrine teaches something really comforting.

The Book of Mormon explains that little children are “alive in Christ” (Moroni 8:12). That means they are already in a state of innocence and closeness to Him. They don’t need extraordinary manifestations to establish that relationship—they already have it.

President Russell M. Nelson has also emphasized how the Lord communicates in personal, individualized ways:

“The Lord has promised that if we will ask, we may receive revelation upon revelation… in ways that are uniquely suited to us.” (Russell M. Nelson, “Revelation for the Church, Revelation for Our Lives,” General Conference, Apr. 2018)

That applies to children just as much as adults. The way a child might feel or understand the Savior’s presence could look very different from a dramatic vision—but it can still be deeply real and meaningful.

So, could a child literally see Jesus Christ?

Yes—it is within the realm of possibility. Scripture and history show that the Lord can reveal Himself to whomever He chooses, including the young.

But should that be something we expect, seek out, or measure ourselves by?

The consistent teaching from Church leaders is no.

Instead, we’re invited to recognize the ways the Savior is already present in our lives—especially through the Holy Ghost. Feelings of peace, comfort, love, and truth are not “lesser” experiences. They are the primary way most of us come to know Him.

And here’s something that tends to settle the question in a really reassuring way: many faithful disciples—including apostles and prophets—have spent their entire lives serving Jesus Christ without ever describing a physical, open vision of Him. And yet, they speak of knowing Him with complete certainty.

That kind of relationship is built quietly. Steadily. Over time.

So if this question comes from a place of hope—or even longing—it might help to gently reframe it.

Instead of asking, “Will Jesus appear to me (or to a child)?” it becomes, “How is Jesus already making Himself known?”

Because, according to both scripture and modern prophets, He absolutely is.

Gramps

]]> https://askgramps.org/is-possible-jesus-appeared-to-me-as-child/feed/ 0 https://askgramps.org/what-are-the-blessings-promised-specifically-to-the-lamanites-and-their-descendants/ https://askgramps.org/what-are-the-blessings-promised-specifically-to-the-lamanites-and-their-descendants/#respond Wed, 14 Jan 2026 09:00:26 +0000 https://askgramps.org/?p=71688 Question

Gramps,

In October 2010, Elder Larry J. Echo Hawk asked everyone (especially those of Lamanite descent) to read the Book of Mormon and to learn of its promises. What blessings are promised specifically to the Lamanites and their descendants? I know that we “will flourish like the rose”, as told to us in D&C, but I can’t find many more blessings that are for this group. Will those blessings apply to all Lamanite descendants, or only to those who are tribal citizens?

Sam

Answer

Sam,

From the beginning, The Book of Mormon positions the Lamanites—a group believed by early Church members to represent Native Americans—as central players in sacred history. According to The Book of Mormon’s title page, its message is “written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel … to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever.”

Scriptural language introduces both blessings and curses tied to covenantal obedience. Grant Underwood (an LDS historian) observes, promises to the Lamanites involved survival, affliction, and eventual restoration: the “penalty of their backsliding is that they shall be scattered and smitten and driven by the Gentiles; the reward of their faith is that they are to survive all their afflictions and in time become the Lord’s own people again.” The Nephites, by contrast, are promised liberty and prosperity if righteous, but extinction if they fall, whereas the Lamanites are granted “an unconditional promise of survival” even through hardship.

Central to these promises is the expectation that, in the latter days, the Lamanites would embrace the gospel and experience a dramatic transformation. Key passages, notably 2 Nephi 30:6, prophesy that the “scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes, and many generations shall not pass away among them save they shall be a white and delightsome people.”  This phrase would gain particular importance in both spiritual and racialized interpretations by Church members over time.

The Book of Mormon frequently employs physical descriptors, associating skin color and “blackness” with righteousness or unrighteousness. In Jacob 3, for example, the prophet rebukes the Nephites for reviling against the Lamanites “because of the darkness of their skins,” explicitly linking pigmentation with their group’s spiritual history. Yet Jacob also insists that if the Nephites do not repent, “their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God”—suggesting a more nuanced or spiritualized reading that goes beyond mere pigment.

However, in early Church practice and teaching, these terms were often taken quite literally. As B.H. Roberts summarized, the “very blackness of their skin is the result of God’s curse upon them for their unrighteousness; yet it is promised that the gospel… shall be declared among them … and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes, and many generations shall not pass away among them save they shall be a white and delightsome people.” This anticipated transformation was not limited to spiritual renewal but was understood by many as literal, physical whitening.

Such views found further support in missionary strategies and the settler colonial context. Joseph Smith and some early leaders taught that intermarriage between Church members and Native Americans would help fulfill the prophecy. In 1861, William W. Phelps recalled what he claimed to be an 1831 revelation attributed to Joseph Smith: “It is my will, in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome, and just; for even now their females are more virtuous than the Gentiles.” Excommunicated Latter-day Saint Ezra T. Booth, writing in the same era, likewise reported that missionaries viewed such intermarriage as not only permissible but divinely sanctioned.

This perspective persisted, in various forms, for decades. Even in the twentieth century, Apostle (and later Church President) Spencer W. Kimball publicly joked about indigenous Church members “lightening” in complexion through righteousness. Similarly, Apostle Bruce R. McConkie wrote that indigenous Americans (“Lamanites”) would in due course “become again a white and delightsome people as were their ancestors many generations ago.”

Over time, the Church’s understanding of these terms and their applications evolved, reflecting both theological development and heightened sensitivity to issues of race and identity. Perhaps the most telling evidence is in the text of The Book of Mormon itself. When Joseph Smith prepared the 1840 edition, he edited 2 Nephi 30:6, replacing “white and delightsome” with “pure and delightsome”—a move suggesting a symbolic or spiritual interpretation was possible and perhaps preferable.

Still, “Lamanite” identity remained centrally important in Church outreach. From the nineteenth century onward, American Indians, indigenous people from Latin America, and even Polynesians have been identified within the tradition as “Lamanites,” with a special destiny prophesied for them. The Encyclopedia of Latter-Day Saint History observes, “Today Latter-day Saints typically identify American Indians, the indigenous peoples of Latin America, and Polynesians of the Pacific as ‘Lamanites’.”

Yet, the real lives and histories of these groups did not always align with the narratives predicted by early missionary optimism and scriptural prophecy. The decades-long mission to indigenous peoples was marked as much by cultural misunderstanding and marginalization as by success or transformation. Notably, the promise that indigenous peoples would “be a white and delightsome people” became increasingly difficult to maintain in a literal sense amid growing awareness of racism and its harms, leading to the greater emphasis on spiritual, not physical, interpretations of scriptural prophecy.

The prophetic tradition of the Church, while originally interpreted through the lens of settler colonial society, holds seeds of reversal to racial hierarchy. As Grant Underwood points out, the Book of Mormon envisions a future where “Gentiles—white Americans—could repent, ‘come in unto the covenant and be numbered among this the remnant of Jacob’ … Gentiles are portrayed as servants, not masters, as nursemaids to royal heirs, and as adopted rather than natural children.” Rather than confirming racial supremacy, the text actually inverts it, offering hope of full inclusion for indigenous peoples as the primary heirs of promised blessings.

And yet, the vocabulary of skin color remains a contentious issue. As recent scholarship notes, while some passages appear to refer directly to skin pigment, others—especially the later edits—open space for a less literal, more symbolic understanding. The 1840 change to “pure and delightsome” signaled, at the very least, unease with the racial connotations of “white and delightsome.”

This tension is emblematic of the broader history of the Church’s engagement with questions of race, inclusion, and belonging. Early leaders and members often combined scriptural promises with the racial attitudes prevalent in their time. As Church membership and leadership have become increasingly global and diverse, a fuller reckoning with these past teachings continues.

Gramps

Dear Gramps,

What does it mean t be a pure Israelite?

Thank you,

M.S.E.

Answer

M.S.E.,

The words “Jew” and “Gentile” originate in ancient Israelite history. Biblically, a “Jew” refers to descendants of the kingdom of Judah, while “Gentile” means anyone not of the house of Israel. However, as the Book of Mormon and modern Church leaders clarify, these distinctions are broader than genealogy alone.

In the language of the Book of Mormon, “Jews” are broadly defined as “those descended from the inhabitants of the kingdom of Judah at the time Lehi left Jerusalem, regardless of whether individuals might have had ancestors not of the tribe of Judah.” Even someone from another tribe, but living in Jerusalem in 600 B.C., could be called a Jew for practical purposes.

Conversely, “Gentile” in a religious sense is any nation or people not belonging to the ancient house of Israel. In common Latter-day Saint parlance, this definition shifts: after joining the Church, members are said to belong to Israel—either by literal descent or by adoption, as revealed in their patriarchal blessing. Those outside the covenant—those who have not united themselves to Abraham’s family through baptism and covenant—remain “Gentile” in this context.

Many picture ancient Israel as a distinct, untainted bloodline. Yet, as both scripture and modern scholarship confirm, the Israelites intermarried widely with the surrounding peoples—Canaanites, Moabites, and even Philistines. Over the centuries, those who joined Israel were absorbed, regardless of their origin, illustrating that kinship in Israel had as much to do with covenant and association as with DNA. Historian John Bright observed:

We are not to suppose that the entity we call Israel was formed and held together in the face of adversity exclusively, or even primarily, through ties of blood kinship… There is abundant evidence that not all Israelites were in fact related one to another by blood.

Thus, “Jew” and “Gentile” are as much spiritual designations as they are genealogical ones.

One of the most distinctive teachings of the Church is that each member receives, through their patriarchal blessing, a declaration of their lineage in the house of Israel—often specifying a tribe, such as Ephraim or Manasseh. This declaration can reflect either literal blood descent or adoption into Israel.

No one today is a “pure Israelite” by blood, except perhaps Jacob (Israel) himself. His children—though called the “twelve tribes”—were only half Israelite, as they shared mothers from other nations. By the time of the Exodus, centuries later, these proportions had diminished even further due to intermarriage. Later dispersions and the mingling with population after population mean that the genetic “blood of Israel” is present in many more people than previously suspected, but rarely in high concentrations.

President Boyd K. Packer summarized Church teachings on this point:

In giving a blessing the patriarch may declare our lineage, that is, that we are of Israel, therefore of the family of Abraham, and of a specific tribe of Jacob. In the great majority of cases, Latter-day Saints are of the tribe of Ephraim, the tribe to which has been committed the leadership of the Latter-day work.

Whether by birth or through the vast, often mysterious movements of peoples and genealogies, Church members are frequently counted as literal descendants of Israel, especially the tribe of Ephraim.

But what if a person is not a literal child of Abraham? The power of the Abrahamic covenant is that it extends to all who embrace the gospel. The Lord can raise up seed unto Abraham from stones if necessary (see Matthew 3:9), and the New Testament repeatedly emphasizes that true descendants do the works of Abraham, irrespective of bloodline. In the Church, those not actually descended from Israel are spiritually adopted—grafted—into the family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as Paul discusses in Romans 8:15-17.

This adoption is not symbolic only. It entitles the convert to all rights, blessings, and privileges, as if they were natural descendants:

If anyone joins the…Church, who is not a lineal descendant of one of the tribes of Israel, is adopted into the house of Israel and has the same status as though he were a literal descendant. Those who join other Christian churches have no such promise made to them, either by their own church authorities or anyone else. Therefore, they have no claim to be descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So they would naturally be designated as Gentiles, i.e., as not pertaining to the house of Israel.

Joseph Smith further clarified:

…the effect of the Holy Ghost upon a Gentile, is to purge out the old blood, and make him actually of the seed of Abraham. That man that has none of the blood of Abraham (naturally) must have a new creation by the Holy Ghost.

Thus, every member of the Church is considered part of Israel—either by descent or adoptive covenant.

For many, the declaration of tribal lineage in a patriarchal blessing is a curiosity: What difference does it make to know my tribe? Why does it matter?

The promise to Abraham was that all nations would be blessed through his seed (Genesis 22:17-18). But the blessing was not just for this life:

17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

 

18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Among the great blessings given to Abraham…is included the astounding blessing that all of those who enter the celestial kingdom of God will be counted as his descendants…If anyone who is not of the lineage of Abraham joins The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints…that person is adopted into one of the twelve tribes of Israel. The government of the kingdom of heaven in the eternities will undoubtedly take into account the various tribes of Israel. Thus, in that realm, each tribe may have particular responsibilities.

While specific tribal responsibilities in the afterlife are not yet fully revealed, the principle is clear: the family of Israel is spiritual more than it is genetic, and participation in the covenants entitles one to the associated blessings and, potentially, special duties.

The Book of Mormon and modern revelation teach that Israel, even when scattered and mixed, is to be gathered, both spiritually and physically, in the last days. As Elder Bruce R. McConkie explained:

The gathering of Israel consists of joining The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and coming to a knowledge of the true God and of Jesus Christ whom he has sent.

Every Christian who is baptized and receives the Holy Ghost, according to Church teaching, becomes an Israelite—no longer a Gentile—no matter their ancestry.

This doctrine unites believers—regardless of background—in an eternal family, bound by covenant more than by genetics. The question ceases to be “Are you Jew or Gentile?” and becomes, “Are you part of the covenant family of God, willing to do the works of Abraham and inherit his promises?” In that spirit, all are invited to gather, belong, and receive every blessing promised to the faithful descendants of Abraham.

Gramps

Dear Gramps,
My in-laws, while well-meaning, are overly involved in all of their children’s marriages. They believe their role is eternal and cite doctrines such as temple sealings and forever families to justify their behavior. I’ve relentlessly pointed to the “leave and cleave” scripture to no avail. We have had to reduce our contact to a very low level. My question is: What do healthy in-law relationships look like in a gospel stewardship framework? What does their role evolve into and become?  Thanks!

Diane

Answer

Diane,

We need to remember that both sets of parents are considered “in-laws” to one of the individuals in a marriage. So boundaries need to be set for both sides, not just who we consider to be in-laws. We’ve all heard the “mother-in-law” jokes. Let’s make sure those jokes aren’t justified.

For members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, family occupies a sacred place in life and doctrine. The teachings of the Church, with their emphasis on eternal families and the stewardship of parenthood, foster strong bonds between parents and children. Yet, as children grow, marry, and embark on their own spiritual journeys, the question arises: How should stewardship and boundaries shift between parents and their adult children? This issue becomes particularly poignant when perspectives differ about spiritual leadership and responsibility within newly formed families. Navigating these changing roles is not only a matter of doctrinal understanding but also of emotional maturity, cultural expectations, and mutual respect.

At the very heart of Church doctrine is the idea of “stewardship”—that parents are entrusted by God with the care, teaching, and nurturance of their children. This stewardship is more than a cultural tradition: it is tied directly to gospel principles of agency, accountability, and eternal progression.

Parents learn from scriptures such as, “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh” (Matthew 19:5). This biblical teaching is foundational in the Church, supports the expectation that newly married couples form independent households and spiritual units of their own.

However, Church doctrine also emphasizes the eternal nature of families. Sealing families in the temple is a pivotal ordinance, reflecting the desire that family ties—parent to child and, most centrally, husband to wife—endure beyond mortal life. Balancing these two concepts can be challenging. The gospel of Jesus Christ is broad enough to allow for both perspectives… while the primary relationship will be that between spouses, [parents] will still have claim on their children.”

As children mature into adults and enter marriage, stewardship necessarily changes. Richard B. Miller, professor of Family Life at Brigham Young University, explains:

Marrying and leaving the parents’ home requires a fundamental shift in the relationship between children and parents. While parents of young children have a divine mandate to supervise and discipline… it is not appropriate for parents to control their adult children. The hierarchy of supervision and control dissolves so that parents and their adult children are on equal footing.

With this shift, new relationships are founded upon mutual respect and friendship. Parents become supporters and counselors rather than overseers and directors. This principle is not only a matter of emotional health, but is rooted in doctrine and prophetic counsel.

It is worth noting that cultural habits can sometimes overshadow doctrine. In some families, expectations of closeness and parental authority can persist long after children have left home to get married. This is often more tradition than doctrine, and may not reflect the actual teachings of the Church.

Ultimately, newly married couples are counseled to “agree what your boundaries are,” and communicate these kindly to both sets of parents, fostering healthy relationships while maintaining appropriate independence.

The transition from a parent-child hierarchy to adult friendship can be fraught with challenges, especially as family members seek to uphold their values, express love, and maintain influence.

The evolution from parental authority to mutual respect is vital. Dr. Miller emphasizes the satisfaction that can come from these adult-to-adult relationships:

These relationships are based on friendship and mutual respect, with each being concerned about the happiness and well-being of the other. Most importantly, these relationships are satisfying for both the parents and the adult children.

Such relationships require effort, humility, and a willingness to accept new roles. Both parents and children can offer kindness, service, and emotional support to each other, but must avoid the temptation to revert to patterns of supervision or dependency.

Church counsel also addresses reciprocity in relationships. Adult children are advised not to expect their parents to act as perpetual benefactors—financial or otherwise—but to strive for independence and, where possible, to reciprocate generosity. Whether by planning a thoughtful family gathering or sharing in household projects, adult children build strong ties by treating their parents as equals.

Failure to make this transition can lead to tension and even damage within families. As President Spencer W. Kimball warned,

Well meaning relatives have broken up many a home. Numerous divorces are attributable to the interference of parents who thought they were only protecting their loved children… Wise parents will honor their children’s adulthood, foster their independence, and respect their marital boundaries, thereby giving their children the opportunity to establish strong marriages.

Thus, safeguarding the independence of young couples—and the integrity of their marriage—becomes a stewardship for parents after their children get married, requiring respect for their choices and leadership in their new family unit.

The challenge of boundaries is further complicated when families do not share the same beliefs or when returning to families of origin conflicts with newly adopted gospel standards.

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are taught that families should be our top priority in life.  At the same time, fidelity to gospel principles cannot be compromised for the sake of pleasing others. This delicate balance is especially evident for converts or those with family members who do not share their religious convictions.

If it were possible to express and show love and acceptance of your family members while maintaining the integrity of your beliefs, you might be a powerful influence for good in their lives, rather than objects of ridicule.

The scriptures counsel members not just to endure difficult family situations, but to do so with love, patience, and kindness: “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love… If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men” (Romans 12:10,18).

Practical guidance includes:

– Protecting one’s spiritual health and standards, even when misunderstood.
– Approaching family relationships with humility, never holding oneself above others.
– Demonstrating care and affection through service, empathy, and patience—avoiding the urge to preach or correct.
– Granting others the same religious freedom one desires: “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”

Joseph Smith taught that example, rather than argument, is often the most persuasive way to influence a family. As Latter-day Saints strive to live the gospel with love and integrity, their gentle influence may create opportunities for understanding without compulsion or contention.

As the Church counsels, honor the sanctity of marriage, the autonomy of adult children, and the eternal bonds that unite families—not by control or compulsion, but through example, kindness, and a spirit of unity.

Gramps

Gramps,

What is the purpose of the 12 tribes in the context of the Plan of Salvation? Do tribes tell us something about our creation age? Or the place we lived in our premortal life?

Abdias

Answer

Abdias,

In the theology of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, belonging to a tribe of Israel is not merely a badge of lineage but represents a connection to the ancient Abrahamic covenant. As outlined in Church teachings, those who join the Church, whether by birthright or conversion, are either literal descendants of one of Israel’s tribes or adopted into that lineage. A stake patriarch—an ordained ecclesiastical leader—may declare by inspiration to which tribe a member belongs in the course of a patriarchal blessing.

This declaration, however, should not be misunderstood as conferring special status or duties in mortal life that trump the universal call to righteousness. All of those who enter the celestial kingdom of God will be counted as [Abraham’s] descendants…anyone who is not of the lineage of Abraham…that person is adopted into one of the twelve tribes of Israel” through their faithfulness in the gospel. The Abrahamic covenant, then, expands to embrace all who accept gospel ordinances, making tribal membership both an identity marker and a sign of having entered into a covenant with God.

Why, then, is it important to know one’s tribe? Church leaders and writers suggest that the greater significance likely lies in the next life rather than in this mortal life. Prophetic statements suggest that in the government of the heavenly kingdom, the various tribes may have distinct responsibilities, reflecting patterns of organization and stewardship that date back to Israelite tradition. While concrete doctrinal details about the future role of the tribes are limited, this connection shows the eternal scope of God’s promises and the ongoing gathering of His people.

Numbers, particularly twelve, play a recurring and powerful role in biblical and Latter-day Saint thought. Twelve is repeatedly associated with divine government and priesthood. The Old Testament describes how Jehovah established His covenant nation among the twelve tribes—descendants of the sons of Jacob (Israel). Interestingly, the scriptural record is not entirely rigid: Joseph’s double-portion blessing is split among his sons Ephraim and Manasseh, and in various tribal lists, one son might be omitted to preserve the count at twelve.

This use of twelve extends to Christ’s calling of twelve apostles, setting a precedent for leadership and priesthood governance. Within the context of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, apostles, presidents, and other leaders operate in quorums and bodies often patterned after the organization of ancient Israel—a divine order perpetuated on earth and anticipated to continue into eternity.

But the symbolism is not arbitrary. Twelve represents wholeness and organization under God’s authority. Twelve (12) is associated with the Government of God, or Priesthood…Jehovah built his covenant nation upon the foundation of 12 tribes. The persistence of this pattern across dispensations reflects God’s consistency and the enduring nature of His promises. It is within this divine governmental order that the importance of tribal identity yet endures.

For members of the Church, the narrative of Israel’s twelve tribes culminates in the prophesied latter-day gathering. This theme is embedded in foundational Church scriptures and Articles of Faith, such as the tenth, which affirms belief “in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes.”

This gathering, however, is understood in two distinct but related senses. First is the spiritual gathering, which occurs as individuals from around the world join the Church and are adopted into the house of Israel—often receiving lineage declarations by revelation, as described earlier. This process is underway wherever people accept the “good news” and the sacred ordinances restored to the earth in this dispensation.

Second is the prophetic restoration of the ten lost tribes, a subject of considerable scriptural intrigue and expectation. Ancient Israel split into two kingdoms, with ten tribes carried away by the Assyrians and later scattered across the world. Modern Church leaders and scholars have reflected that while many of their descendants are now scattered and assimilated among the nations, a main body of the ten tribes remains together, awaiting a miraculous return. Notably, the Savior Himself referred to this group in 3 Nephi 17:4, stating that the ten tribes “are not lost unto the Father, for he knoweth whither he hath taken them.” Furthermore, the Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 29:13, suggests that this group will produce their own records as evidence of their continued existence as a people.

The restoration of these tribes is placed in close connection with the Lord’s return. Scriptures and prophetic interpretation suggest that the ten tribes will likely return as a group, recognized as such, bringing with them sacred records and participating in the ushering in of the millennial reign of Christ. This event surpasses the ancient exodus in magnitude and fulfills the dream of a fully gathered Israel.

But even for the so-called “lost” tribes, their dispersion has not ended God’s purposes. As Latter-day Saint scholar B.H. Roberts explained, over the centuries, the blood of Israel became intermingled among all nations, fulfilling the prophetic assurance that Israel would be sifted among the people of the earth. Today, many supposed Gentiles may, in fact, have Israelite ancestry—literal descendants unaware of their heritage until called by the Spirit to gather in modern Zion.

The practical effect of knowing one’s tribe is both deeply personal and profoundly communal. For members of The Church, receiving a patriarchal blessing that indicates lineage serves as a reminder to fulfill sacred responsibilities, to participate actively in the gathering of Israel, and to build up Zion in preparation for the Second Coming. It also contextualizes personal identity within a vast, divinely orchestrated story that stretches from Abraham through Jacob, Christ, and into our own day.

More broadly, this awareness fosters unity among Church members, as all are embraced as part of the covenant Israel—whether by birth or adoption—each with a unique place and purpose in God’s unfolding plan. As the gathering progresses, the diverse descendants of Israel are brought together in anticipation of a time when distinctions may again organize service and stewardship under the governance of God, both on earth and, as many anticipate, in eternity itself.

Gramps

Question

Gramps,

Which of the Twelve Tribes do black people belong to?

Richard

Answer

Richard,

Patriarchal lineage refers to the ancestral line through which blessings and responsibilities are passed down in the context of the Church. According to Church doctrine, all members are considered descendants of Abraham, and through him, they are connected to the twelve tribes of Israel. This connection is not merely symbolic; it is believed to have spiritual significance, particularly in the context of patriarchal blessings, which are personal revelations given to members of the Church that often include their tribal affiliation.

Patriarchal blessings are a unique aspect of the Church’s practice, serving as a personal declaration of one’s lineage and divine potential. These blessings are administered by a patriarch, who is a priesthood holder authorized to give such blessings. The blessings often identify the recipient’s tribe, which can be Ephraim, Manasseh, Judah, or others. However, the process is not straightforward, as it requires revelation and personal guidance from God.  We can’t just give a blanket statement as to which tribe a certain group of people would belong to or adopted into.

The Church is a global organization, and its membership reflects a wide array of ethnic backgrounds. While many members are identified as descendants of Ephraim, there are also members from other tribes, including those of African descent. The Church’s teachings emphasize that individuals of all races and ethnicities can belong to any of the tribes of Israel, and this is confirmed through patriarchal blessings. Blacks would be no different than those of any other race. This inclusivity is a vital aspect of the Church’s doctrine, promoting the idea that all are equal in the eyes of God.

Historically, the Church has faced challenges regarding race and the priesthood. Before 1978, members of African descent were restricted from holding the priesthood, a policy that was rooted in complex historical and cultural factors. This policy was officially rescinded in 1978, allowing all worthy male members, regardless of race, to receive the priesthood. This change marked a significant shift in the Church’s approach to race and lineage, opening the doors for greater inclusivity and participation among members of African descent.

The revelation in 1978 that lifted the priesthood ban for men of African descent was a pivotal moment in the Church’s history. It not only allowed for greater participation of Black members in Church leadership but also signified a broader acceptance of diversity within the Church. Following this revelation, many Black families began to participate more fully in Church activities, including temple worship and missionary work. The story of Helvécio and Ruda Martins, who contributed to the construction of the São Paulo Temple despite not being able to enter it at the time, illustrates the faith and resilience of Black members during this transitional period.

Understanding one’s lineage is not only relevant in this life but is also believed to have implications for the next. According to Church teachings, those who are adopted into the tribes of Israel through patriarchal blessings will have specific roles and responsibilities in the afterlife. This belief displays the importance of lineage as a means of connecting individuals to their spiritual heritage and divine potential. The declaration of to which tribe of Israel any person belongs may be more important for life in the next world than it is in mortality.

For many members, understanding their lineage is a source of identity and belonging within the Church. The belief that all members can be part of the house of Israel fosters a sense of unity and purpose. This is particularly significant for members of African descent, who may have historically felt marginalized within the Church. The acknowledgment that they can belong to any tribe of Israel reinforces their place within the community and affirms their spiritual heritage.

The Church teaches that revelation is essential in understanding one’s lineage. Patriarchal blessings are not merely ceremonial; they are considered divine communications that provide insight into an individual’s spiritual identity. This reliance on revelation emphasizes the personal nature of faith within the Church, allowing members to seek guidance and understanding from God regarding their lineage and purpose.

As the Church continues to grow and diversify, the understanding of lineage will likely evolve. The increasing global membership brings new perspectives and experiences that can enrich the Church’s teachings on lineage and identity. The Church’s commitment to inclusivity and revelation will play a crucial role in shaping the future of how lineage is understood and embraced by all members.

Gramps

Gramps,

Is it possible that God was once like Jesus, having had to learn as a mortal individual before ascending to godhood? And if that’s so, wouldn’t that mean he was the spiritual son of someone else? Do we just have a whole extended godly family out there?

Berry

Answer

Berry,

The belief in a Heavenly Mother is unique to the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While there are no explicit scriptural references to Heavenly Mother, the doctrine is rooted in the understanding that all human beings are spirit children of divine parents. This belief is encapsulated in the hymn “O My Father,” which expresses the idea that we have a mother in heaven, stating, “In the heav’ns are parents single? No, the thought makes reason stare!” This hymn reflects the Church’s acknowledgment of Heavenly Mother as an integral part of its theology, even if the specifics of her role remain largely speculative.

The idea of Heavenly Mother can be traced back to the 1840s, during the early days of the Church. Although contemporary evidence suggests that Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church, did not teach extensively about Heavenly Mother, later Church leaders and writers have affirmed her existence and significance. The Church has instructed its members not to pray to Heavenly Mother, emphasizing that while she is acknowledged, the focus of worship should remain on Heavenly Father.

In Latter-day Saint theology, God the Father is viewed as the Supreme Being, the ultimate Creator, and the embodiment of perfection. He is described as having a body of flesh and bones, which aligns with the belief that humans are created in His image. This physicality of God is a significant departure from traditional Christian views of God as a purely spiritual being. The Church teaches that all humans are literal children of God, spiritually begotten in the premortal existence, which establishes a familial relationship between humanity and the divine.

The question of whether Heavenly Father has a Father—essentially, whether there is a Heavenly Grandfather—arises from the doctrine of eternal progression. This doctrine posits that God the Father was once a mortal being who progressed to become a God, suggesting a hierarchy of divine beings. While there is no definitive scriptural evidence to confirm this idea, it remains a topic of speculation and discussion among Church members. The notion that God the Father may have a Father implies an eternal lineage of divine beings, each progressing toward perfection.

Eternal progression is a fundamental tenet of Latter-day Saint theology, emphasizing that individuals can continue to grow and develop spiritually throughout eternity. This belief is rooted in the idea that humans are not only children of God but also have the potential to become like Him. The doctrine suggests that through obedience to God’s commandments and the principles of the gospel, individuals can achieve exaltation and become gods themselves.

This concept raises intriguing questions about the nature of divinity and the potential for humans to create worlds and spirit children, similar to how God the Father created the earth. The idea that sealed husbands and wives can beget spiritual children as gods in the afterlife is a belief that has persisted within the Church. This doctrine reinforces the importance of family relationships and the eternal nature of marriage, as it suggests that these relationships extend beyond mortality.

The doctrine of eternal families is central to the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Church teaches that families can be sealed together for eternity through sacred ordinances performed in temples. This sealing power, believed to be held by the priesthood, allows families to remain united in the afterlife, creating a divine family structure that mirrors the relationship between Heavenly Parents and their children.

The concept of eternal families provides comfort and hope to members of the Church, as it emphasizes that relationships formed in this life can continue beyond death. The belief that individuals will be reunited with their loved ones in the afterlife is a source of strength for many, reinforcing the idea that family is central to God’s plan for humanity.

The afterlife, according to Latter-day Saint theology, is not a binary division of heaven and hell but rather a complex spirit world where individuals continue to progress. Upon death, spirits enter a realm where they are separated based on their righteousness. The righteous are believed to dwell in a state of peace and happiness, while the wicked are in a state of suffering. This understanding of the spirit world allows for the possibility of growth and repentance even after death, aligning with the doctrine of eternal progression.

The teachings of early Church leaders, such as Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, suggest that the spirit world is not far removed from our earthly existence. They taught that spirits are aware of our thoughts and feelings and can influence our lives in subtle ways. This belief in the proximity of the spirit world adds a layer of complexity to the understanding of family relationships in the afterlife, as it suggests that our deceased loved ones may still be involved in our lives.

In the context of the spirit world, the role of angels and divine beings becomes significant. Angels are often viewed as messengers and servants of God, assisting in the work of salvation. The idea that exalted beings, including Heavenly Parents, may play a role in the rearing of spirit children is a topic of speculation within the Church. While there is no definitive scriptural basis for this belief, it aligns with the understanding of a loving and involved God who desires the best for His children.

The concept of divine beings creating and nurturing spirit children raises questions about the nature of parenthood in the afterlife. If Heavenly Parents are involved in the creation of spirit children, it suggests a continuation of familial relationships that transcend mortal life. This belief reinforces the idea that the divine family structure is not only a reflection of earthly families but also a model for eternal relationships.

Gramps

Gramps,

Why is the age of accountability eight? Seems random. Is there some biblical tie back?

Isaac

Answer

Isaac,

The age of accountability is defined as the age at which children are considered capable of understanding right from wrong and are thus accountable for their actions before God. In the Church, this age is set at eight years old, as outlined in Doctrine and Covenants 68:27, which states that children are not accountable until they reach this age. We believe that children are inherently innocent and blameless before God until they reach a level of understanding that allows them to comprehend sin and repentance. Elder Delbert L. Stapley said;

Frequently when meeting a young boy or girl of seven years, I inquire what will happen to them when they attain the age of eight. It pleases me when they quickly reply, “I am going to be baptized!” I know these young children have been taught of their parents and prepared to receive baptism when they become accountable before God. (April 26, 1966, BYU Speeches of the Year, 1966, p. 6.)

The notion of innocence in children is a cornerstone of the Church’s teachings. According to the doctrine, children who have not yet reached the age of accountability are considered “innocent” and “blameless” before God. This perspective is supported by various scriptures, including Moroni 8:12, which states that “little children are alive in Christ.” This scripture emphasizes that children are not subject to sin until they reach an age where they can understand the consequences of their actions.

In response to concerns about behaviors exhibited by young children, such as anger or lying, it is essential to differentiate between the actions of children and the concept of sin. A three-year-old who steals does not possess the cognitive ability to understand the moral implications of their actions. They act out of desire rather than malice, which displays their innocent nature. The Church teaches that these behaviors do not equate to sin in the eyes of God, as children lack the capacity for repentance until they reach the age of accountability.

The scriptural basis for the age of accountability is found in several passages. For instance, in 1 Peter 3:20-21, the Apostle Peter draws a parallel between the flood and baptism, suggesting that just as Noah and his family were saved through water, baptism serves as a means of salvation for believers today. While some may interpret the number eight in this context as significant, the primary focus is on the act of baptism itself rather than the number of souls saved.

Moreover, the teachings of Joseph Smith, the founder of The Church, further clarify the understanding of accountability. In his inspired translation of Genesis, he states that children are not accountable before God until they are eight years old. This strengthens the idea that the age of eight is divinely appointed and reflects God’s understanding of human development.

As children approach the age of accountability, the role of parents and Church leaders becomes crucial. It is their responsibility to teach children about the principles of the gospel, including repentance, faith in Christ, and the importance of baptism. The Church emphasizes that children should be prepared for baptism by understanding the covenant associated with this ordinance, which includes promises to remember Jesus Christ and keep His commandments.

Parents are encouraged to engage in meaningful discussions with their children about the significance of baptism and the responsibilities that come with it. This preparation is vital to ensure that children can make an informed decision when they reach the age of accountability. The Church provides resources and guidance to help parents fulfill this important role in their children’s spiritual development.

The question of whether infants and children are included in the statement “for all have sinned” in Romans 3:23 is a common concern. The Church teaches that this scripture refers to those who are accountable before God. Therefore, it does not apply to children who have not yet reached the age of accountability. The distinction between innocence and accountability is crucial in understanding the nature of sin and the divine plan of salvation.

In the context of the Church, sin is defined as a willful act against God’s commandments. Children, being innocent and blameless, do not possess the capacity to sin until they reach an age where they can understand the moral implications of their actions. This understanding is essential for true repentance, which requires a recognition of wrongdoing and a desire to change.

As children grow and develop, they will inevitably encounter situations that challenge their understanding of right and wrong. The Church acknowledges that children mature at different rates, and not all children will reach the age of accountability with the same level of understanding. This variability is taken into account in the Church’s teachings, emphasizing that God knows each individual’s heart and mind.

The Church encourages parents and leaders to provide guidance and support to children as they navigate their spiritual journey. Teaching children about the principles of the gospel, including the importance of repentance and the significance of baptism, is essential in helping them understand their relationship with God. The Church provides resources and programs designed to assist parents in this endeavor, ensuring that children are well-prepared for the responsibilities that come with baptism.

In addition to parental guidance, the Church emphasizes the role of community in nurturing children’s spiritual growth. Church leaders and members are encouraged to create an environment that fosters learning and understanding, allowing children to feel supported as they approach the age of accountability.

Gramps

Gramps,

Are there special blessings or privileges associated with being born into the covenant? Does it also hold more responsibilities?

Kelly

Answer

Kelly,

At the heart of the doctrine of being born in the covenant is the understanding of covenants themselves. In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a covenant is a sacred agreement between God and His children. The most significant of these is the eternal marriage covenant, which is made in the temple. This covenant is conditional upon the faithfulness of the participants, meaning that if either partner fails to uphold their end of the agreement, the covenant can be broken, and the marriage is no longer valid after death.

However, the sealing of children to their parents is distinct. This sealing is unconditional and is believed to remain in effect regardless of the actions of the children. As Joseph Smith stated, “That the eternal sealings of faithful parents and the divine promises made to them for valiant service in the Cause of Truth, would save not only themselves, but likewise their posterity.” This means that children born to parents who are sealed in the temple inherit certain spiritual blessings and protections, even if they stray from the path of righteousness.

Being born in the covenant comes with numerous spiritual advantages. First and foremost, it provides a sense of belonging and identity within the framework of the gospel. Children born in the covenant are often taught from a young age about their divine heritage and the expectations that come with it. This upbringing can instill a strong sense of purpose and direction in their lives.

Moreover, the doctrine suggests that those born in the covenant have a divine safety net. Joseph Smith’s quote emphasizes that even if children wander from the faith, they are not abandoned. The “eye of the Shepherd is upon them,” and they will eventually feel the pull of divine providence, leading them back to the fold. This belief can be a source of comfort for parents and families, as it reinforces the idea that their efforts in raising their children in the gospel will ultimately bear fruit, even if it takes time.

While the blessings of being born in the covenant are significant, they also come with responsibilities. Children born in the covenant are expected to uphold the teachings of the gospel and to live in a manner that reflects their divine heritage. This includes following the commandments, participating in church activities, and striving for personal righteousness.

Additionally, there is an understanding that being born in the covenant does not exempt individuals from the consequences of their choices. As Gramps explained in a previous Q&A, “They will have to pay their debt to justice; they will suffer for their sins; and may tread a thorny path.” This means that while the sealing to faithful parents provides a spiritual safety net, it does not eliminate the need for personal accountability. Each individual must still navigate their own path and make choices that align with the teachings of the gospel.

One of the most profound questions surrounding the doctrine of being born in the covenant is how it aligns with the principles of divine justice. The scriptures teach that God is just, merciful, and kind. This duality can sometimes seem contradictory, especially when considering the fate of those who stray from the path of righteousness.

In the context of being born in the covenant, divine justice is served through the process of repentance and accountability. As Gramps has noted in the past, those who stray may not come forth in the first resurrection and may face consequences for their actions, but ultimately, they will have the opportunity to return to their heavenly parents. This process ensures that justice is served while still allowing for the possibility of mercy and redemption.

Repentance plays a crucial role in reconciling the concepts of justice and mercy. The doctrine teaches that all individuals, regardless of their background, have the opportunity to repent and return to God. This is particularly significant for those born in the covenant, as their divine heritage provides them with a unique understanding of the gospel and the tools necessary for repentance.

Joseph Smith’s statement emphasizes the importance of prayer and faith in the process of bringing wayward children back to the fold. He encourages parents to “hold on to them with your faith” and to “hope on, trust on, till you see the salvation of God.”  This highlights the belief that while individuals may stray, the love and support of their families, combined with their own efforts to repent, can lead them back to a place of righteousness.

Gramps

Gramps,

My wife and I have accepted callings as Ordinance Workers in Manti. I’m confused why children who have died before the age of accountability need no baptism, confirmation, initiatories, or endowments.

Matthew

Answer

Matthew,

According to the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the age of accountability is set at eight years old. This is based on the scripture found in Doctrine and Covenants 68:27, which states,

And their children shall be baptized for the remission of their sins when eight years old, and receive the laying on of the hands.

Before this age, children are considered innocent and incapable of sinning. This belief is further supported by Moroni 8:10-12, which emphasizes that little children need no repentance or baptism, as they are alive in Christ and are saved through His grace.

The Church teaches that children under the age of accountability are pure and innocent, and thus, they are received into the Celestial Kingdom without the need for baptism or other ordinances. This doctrine provides solace to parents who have lost children, assuring them that their little ones are safe and secure in the arms of a loving Heavenly Father.

Mortality is viewed as a critical period for testing and growth for those who reach the age of accountability. As Bruce R. McConkie explained,

Mortality is fully upon us when we first breathe the breath of life.

This implies that those who are accountable must undergo trials and challenges to develop their character and faith. However, for children who die before this age, the need for such testing is not applicable. They are seen as having already achieved a state of purity that allows them to bypass the trials of mortality.

Bruce R. McConkie has also said on the subject:

Accountability does not burst full-bloom upon a child at any given moment in his life. Children become accountable gradually, over a number of years. Becoming accountable is a process. … There comes a time, however, when accountability is real and actual and sin is attributed in the lives of those who develop normally. It is eight years of age, the age of baptism.

The Prophet Joseph Smith touched on this subject himself. He lost many to death during his lifetime, including six children:

The Lord takes many away, even in infancy, that they may escape the envy of man, and the sorrows and evils of this present world; they were too pure, too lovely, to live on earth.

This perspective emphasizes that the death of a child is not a tragedy in the same way it is for adults; rather, it is a merciful act that allows them to avoid the hardships of a fallen world.

Joseph F. Smith also taught that children who die in infancy will be resurrected and will continue to grow and develop in the afterlife. He stated,

It matters not whether these tabernacles mature in this world, or have to wait and mature in the world to come.

This assurance provides hope to grieving parents, as it suggests that they will have the opportunity to nurture and raise their children in the eternities.

The doctrine of salvation for children under eight is rooted in the belief that they are inherently innocent and free from sin. Moroni 8:12 states,

But little children are alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world.

This scripture emphasizes the idea that children are covered by the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and their salvation is assured. The Church teaches that they do not require baptism or other ordinances because they are not accountable for their actions.

This belief is further reinforced by the understanding that the Atonement of Christ is all-encompassing. As Elder Melvin J. Ballard noted,

You mothers worry about your little children [who have died]. We do not perform sealings for them… Do not worry over it. They are safe; they are all right. (Bryant S. Hinckley, Sermons and Missionary Services of Melvin J. Ballard, Deseret Book Company, 1949, p. 260.)

This message of reassurance is vital for parents who may struggle with the loss of a child, as it emphasizes the eternal safety and happiness of their little ones.

Given the Church’s teachings on the age of accountability, it follows that children who die before reaching this age do not require endowments. The natural order of ordinances in the Church begins with baptism, followed by confirmation, and then endowments. Since children under eight are not baptized, they do not progress to the point of needing endowments. As stated in Doctrine and Covenants 137:10,

And all children who die before they arrive at the years of accountability are saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven.

This reinforces the idea that their eternal destiny is secure without the need for additional ordinances.

For parents who have lost children, the doctrine of accountability offers a unique perspective on their role in the afterlife. While they may not have the opportunity to raise their children in this life, they can find comfort in the belief that they will be reunited with them in the eternities. Joseph F. Smith’s teachings suggest that parents will have the chance to nurture their children as they grow into their full potential in the afterlife. This belief can provide solace and hope to grieving parents, allowing them to focus on the eternal nature of their relationships.

Gramps