Progress between kingdoms of glory is one of the perennial Mormon debates. Not because it is of primary importance. Not because it’s widespread. But among the minority of Mormons who like to try and extrapolate from the gospel, it’s one of those things that come up. It is a mostly theoretical question, though it could have some practical bearing if one were to accept an doctrine of easy progress between the degrees of glory and so shrug the importance of this life. It could also have some practical bearing if a doctrine of stern barriers between kingdoms were presented in a way that made God seem less than loving and wise. To the extent people get worked up when they argue about this, it is probably because they are concerned about one extreme or the other.

I recently was asked to address an investigator’s concerns about the subject. Here is what I wrote:

The scriptures do not clearly state whether there is progress between kingdoms.  You can point to scriptures talking about the finality of judgment and such, but getting from that to the issue of progress between kingdoms is a deduction.  Same with the idea of families being ripped apart because one spouse joins the church and the others don’t–we know that both spouses progressing together is the right path, but if that doesn’t happen, which it may not for any  number of reasons, we don’t actually know what that entails in the long run.  There are scriptures you could point to that suggest some kind of permanent separation, but then there are sayings of Joseph Smith and even of quite modern prophets that suggest that one exalted human pulls up with them all their loved ones and perhaps even all their loved ones’ loved ones and so on.  The fact is, we just don’t know for sure.  We see through a glass darkly.  It is possible that in our mortal state we can’t know.

Same with damnation: there isn’t a single definitive scriptural or revealed explanation for what damnation is.  We know it’s a not a good thing per se, but we also know that all the kingdoms of glory are kingdoms of glory, not kingdoms of weeping and wailing.  Something that would naturally and simply be described as eternal torment is not what is coming down the pike for anyone outside possibly the sons of perdition.

Now, it sometimes seems like the main proponents of progress between Kingdoms are Mormon liberals who usually use it to argue that we shouldn’t get too hung up about  morality in this life, particularly sexual morality.  So folks sometimes reject the possibility more dogmatically than they ought because they think they are affirming the reality of right and wrong and of consequences for sin.

My own view on these questions is as follows:  The Father wants the most good for each and every child-soul that it is capable of having.  This is axiomatic.  It follows that there is no such thing as an irrevocable final judgment that consigns a soul to a state that it could be lifted out of by any possible expedient at some time in the infinite future.

At the same time, there is the primacy of free will. Free will means choices with consequences, the most fundamental of which are shaping one’s own character.  For that reason, I believe that people can and do freely choose to become souls who cannot be lifted out of their lesser state by any possible expedient at any time in the infinite future.  People can say ‘no’ to God so definitively that they will give the same answer every time its asked, in any form its asked, no matter what happens to them henceforth.  In that circumstances, God would give them the best of what He could based on the areas and the ways in which they would say ‘yes.’  Which sounds very much like the concept of a lesser kingdom of glory to me.  My personal idea of one of these lesser kingdoms of glory is something like elf-isle of Eressea.  The leaves fall not, but at the same time there is some sense of loss.

I don’t know if the Judgment assigns everybody to the celestial kingdom who will arrive at the exalted state someday, perhaps only after aeons of time, or if it assigns everybody to the kingdom that corresponds with their present spiritual state.  If the former, then there could be no progress between kingdoms.  If the latter, then there would be.

Because of my view that there can be final rejections of God, whether partial or total, I don’t believe that everyone who is exalted will see everyone they love be exalted with them.  If someone constitutes the core of their character in rejecting God in some area, they will ultimately have to reject their spouse, their parents, their children, their siblings, their friends, in the same area.  We cannot infringe on each other’s free will any more than God can.  At the same time, because I see the kingdoms of glory as more a state of being than a category to which one is assigned, I see no reason why some kind of continuing relationship can’t be maintained by anyone who is willing to maintain it, even if they are and forever will be at different spiritual states (which suggests a wildly heretical speculation about the Mother in Heaven question, but never mind that all that).  Indeed, if eternity consists of the presentness* of all experienced moments of time, then it follows that no relationship can ever cease to exist, even if it ceases to continue.  The scriptures do say that no unclean thing can enter the presence of God, but then we also had Christ walk among us and I, a sinner, have often had the Holy Ghost, so that isn’t a definitive answer that ‘unequally yoked’ spouses must necessarily be separated in the hereafter forever and aye.

Bottom line:

We know for certain that God loves us with a love that will not end.  He will never relent in bringing to pass our individual immortality and eternal life.

We know that there is a judgment. We know that judgment is real.  we know that it is necessary.

We know that our choices in this life are meaningful and have consequences.

Anything more than that is extrapolation and should be believed only in moderation.

*Yes, this is an ugly neologism. Sue me