Doctrine on children who die fulfills a primal desire for Latter-day Saint parents

The second-hardest thing I have ever done is hold my infant son in my arms and watch Ray die. The hardest task for my wife and me were allowing Ray to die without a fight. He was born in 2000 with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, which meant that his heart wouldn’t function on its own. After reviewing the doctors’ options, which involved a high expectation of pain for Ray and a survival chance that a dispassionate observer would rate as virtually nil, we allowed our son to die.


A key advantage of grief is that it allows sorrow to be put into perspective. The months before Ray’s birth, when he was diagnosed, and several months to years after his short life, were very difficult. Moments intended for matrimonial passion become a time for tears when you look into your spouse’s eyes and know what both of you are thinking of. You look at children born at the same time as Ray and resist an impulse of bitter envy. You mentally plug your ears to condolences that your child “was too pure for the world” or vain exclamations from the pulpit of how prayer saved so and so’s child.

But grief is a positive. With time, it allows comprehension to sink in that what happened to your child happens to many, many others every year. You realize that 24 hours with a healthy baby makes you very lucky compared to the countless others left to die too early in terrifying circumstances, with no one to comfort them. If you don’t understand that life’s not fair, that our Creator doesn’t play favorites, then grief can turn you into a selfish, self-pitying person — and that’s a bigger shame than the loss of an innocent.

My wife and I do cling to a faith-based belief that others may call fantasy. We’re LDS, and we regard Joseph Smith as a prophet. When Smith was alive, he taught this, according to a 1918 edition of The Improvement Era: 

President Joseph F. Smith, the sixth President of the Church, reported: ‘Joseph Smith taught the doctrine that the infant child that was laid away in death would come up in the resurrection as a child; and, pointing to the mother of a lifeless child, he said to her: ‘You will have the joy, the pleasure and satisfaction of nurturing this child, after its resurrection, until it reaches the full stature of its spirit.’ …

"In 1854, I met with my aunt [Agnes Smith], the wife of my uncle, Don Carlos Smith, who was the mother of that little girl [Sophronia] that Joseph Smith, the Prophet, was speaking about, when he told the mother that she should have the joy, the pleasure, and the satisfaction of rearing that child, after the resurrection, until it reached the full stature of its spirit; and that it would be a far greater joy than she could possibly have in mortality, because she would be free from the sorrow and fear and disabilities of mortal life, and she would know more than she could know in this life. I met that widow, the mother of that child, and she told me this circumstance and bore testimony to me that this was what the Prophet Joseph Smith said when he was speaking at the funeral of her little daughter."

I choose to believe that I, with many other happy parents, will raise children who died too soon. I’m not convinced of that because a group of retired businessmen say it. I base it on my faith in a loving God and a primal desire to have that privilege. 

But if I’m wrong, I refuse to be disappointed. The 24 hours my wife and I had with Ray was another blessing we will always thank God for.


-- Doug Gibson

Originally published at StandardNET in 2010

Map of Heaven advocates more study of afterlife

First, neurosurgeon Eben Alexander published “Proof of Heaven,” his account of a near-death experience he had when in a coma due to a severe meningitis attack. The book was a big success, and not surprisingly has its many admirers and detractors. Claims of an afterlife, not to mention personal accounts, have that whiff of religion that annoys secularists and atheists. On the flip side, just about any claim of a near-death experience is held up as “proof” by believers in the divine.

However, in his follow-up book, “The Map of Heaven” (co-written with Ptolemy Tompkins), Alexander is deliberately de-emphasizing the religious angle to the afterlife, while not completely eliminating it. Instead, Alexander advocates the science of the prenatural, or “supraphysical realms” that exist beyond earth. He argues that the philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, personal experiences -- some noted in the book -- and the work of historical scientists and academics make it necessary to consider the afterlife and near-death experiences as a science to be studied, rather than something based only on faith. The author cites the Division of Perceptual Studies at the University of Virginia as one academic center where consciousness, including perceptions of the afterlife, are being studied.

I found the book persuasive but I’m a believer, and as mentioned, there’s no doubt that a cottage industry trying to debunk Alexander and others will always be around. And to be fair, proof that one can touch is not going to be found in “Map of Heaven.” Alexander believes that all humans have an inherent knowledge of a divine existence, and that to lose it, or enhance it, are acquired traits. He argues that as young children we were more in tune with these perceptions, and that their strength weakens as we age. He further argues that religions -- not one religion -- are tools for humans to regain the spiritual consciousness that we once had as children. In fact, he asserts that just about every religion in the world has as its goal, and accomplishment, a path to understanding the afterlife and the greater consciousness. Our ability to tap into this metaphysical portion of the earth depends on us. The author suggests meditation, and accompanying music, as positive tools.

In the book, Alexander writes, “... it’s important to understand that beneath the ’religion vs. science’ debates that lead nowhere, there is another, deeper, and fantastically fruitful discussion going on. In this discussion, a new group of participants -- people who have undergone near death experiences, out-of-body experiences, and other experiences suggestive of the survival of consciousness -- are increasingly being allowed to describe the experiences they’ve undergone. And a small but select group of scientists have decided to take them seriously; to ponder, with the combination of fierce intellectual rigor and vigorous, empirical open-mindedness that all good science demands, what they might mean.”

Since this is a community with a majority of members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I’ll mention some similarities in “Map of Heaven” to Mormon theology, with the reminder that Alexander appropriately is disinterested in picking a preferred religion. “Map of Heaven” describes an afterlife that is located in the same world we exist and is comprised of several layers of consciousness, each more perfect than the other. In fact, Alexander argues that each object in our world probably has a more-enhanced version of itself in another layer of existence. We enjoy more perfection as we advance to each higher level. 

The book is written kindly; it’s not preachy or supercilious. Nevertheless, Alexander wants the reader to understand that despite their doubts, he knows that an afterlife exists. In fact, he urges that the word “believe” be changed to “know” when it comes to the divine, quoting Carl Jung, who late in his life said, “I don’t believe; I know,” when asked for his stance on the afterlife. Further study on the divine is envisioned by the author as a means toward better understanding a discipline that is with us and has always been with us.

Recognizing the divine, understanding that there is a map of the afterlife, can provide meaning to a world that sometimes seems meaningless. The adversity of the world, great or small, is a preparation for something greater. The author writes, “... ’all shall be well’ is not the same as ’everything is peachy.’ It does not mean the world is without its terrors and sufferings. It means that we can navigate this world if we remember one thing: that beneath its apparent meaninglessness, there is a world of meaning which is rich beyond all imagining.”

As mentioned, this is a subject that is easy to play the skeptic with; perhaps that’s because scoffing at personal experiences involving the afterlife or increased consciousness is easier than wondering if there is something to all this and perhaps even trying to see if we can enhance our own consciousness. I think I can echo Alexander and others that despite what our personal opinion on these issues are, the best stance is to respect the opinions of all involved.

-- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardNET

LDS doctrine on children who die fulfills a primal desire

The second-hardest thing I have ever done is hold my infant son in my arms and watch Ray die. The hardest task for my wife and me were allowing Ray to die without a fight. He was born in 2000 with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, which meant that his heart wouldn’t function on its own. After reviewing the doctors’ options, which involved a high expectation of pain for Ray and a survival chance that a dispassionate observer would rate as virtually nil, we allowed our son to die.


A key advantage of grief is that it allows sorrow to be put into perspective. The months before Ray’s birth, when he was diagnosed, and several months to years after his short life, were very difficult. Moments intended for matrimonial passion become a time for tears when you look into your spouse’s eyes and know what both of you are thinking of. You look at children born at the same time as Ray and resist an impulse of bitter envy. You mentally plug your ears to condolences that your child “was too pure for the world” or vain exclamations from the pulpit of how prayer saved so and so’s child.

But grief is a positive. With time, it allows comprehension to sink in that what happened to your child happens to many, many others every year. You realize that 24 hours with a healthy baby makes you very lucky compared to the countless others left to die too early in terrifying circumstances, with no one to comfort them. If you don’t understand that life’s not fair, that our Creator doesn’t play favorites, then grief can turn you into a selfish, self-pitying person — and that’s a bigger shame than the loss of an innocent.

My wife and I do cling to a faith-based belief that others may call fantasy. We’re LDS, and we regard Joseph Smith as a prophet. When Smith was alive, he taught this, according to a 1918 edition of The Improvement Era: 

President Joseph F. Smith, the sixth President of the Church, reported: ‘Joseph Smith taught the doctrine that the infant child that was laid away in death would come up in the resurrection as a child; and, pointing to the mother of a lifeless child, he said to her: ‘You will have the joy, the pleasure and satisfaction of nurturing this child, after its resurrection, until it reaches the full stature of its spirit.’ …

"In 1854, I met with my aunt [Agnes Smith], the wife of my uncle, Don Carlos Smith, who was the mother of that little girl [Sophronia] that Joseph Smith, the Prophet, was speaking about, when he told the mother that she should have the joy, the pleasure, and the satisfaction of rearing that child, after the resurrection, until it reached the full stature of its spirit; and that it would be a far greater joy than she could possibly have in mortality, because she would be free from the sorrow and fear and disabilities of mortal life, and she would know more than she could know in this life. I met that widow, the mother of that child, and she told me this circumstance and bore testimony to me that this was what the Prophet Joseph Smith said when he was speaking at the funeral of her little daughter."

I choose to believe that I, with many other happy parents, will raise children who died too soon. I’m not convinced of that because a group of retired businessmen say it. I base it on my faith in a loving God and a primal desire to have that privilege. 

But if I’m wrong, I refuse to be disappointed. The 24 hours my wife and I had with Ray was another blessing we will always thank God for.


-- Doug Gibson

Originally published at StandardNET in 2010