Is change coming to Mormon temple wedding policy?

[Anonymous]

The policy was started in the 60s.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

The policy was started in the 60s.

Who was in the leadership then? Just saying.

[Anonymous]

If it is a rumor, how sad. What a simple thing to change… at least from my perspective.

[Anonymous]

I have been thinking about this. If true it seems to me it is only going to work if the church actually removes itself from the legal aspects of marriage and sticks with the religious end. The church would have to not only allow but require a civil wedding. If they stick with a temple wedding as being both legal and religious that is still going to be the preferred ceremony. Sure members will say you can have a civil wedding but what you really want is to go to the temple first. Anything less will still be frowned on. If not by the church certainly by members. It could take generations to loose the stigma.

Also if they are going to put some kind of deadline like 48 hours or something on it to get to the temple they are once again imposing how useless the civil wedding is.

The more I think about it a one year wait to go to the temple is not so bad. More members just need to have the guts to do it and not be intimidated to do otherwise.

[Anonymous]

I just finished reading Devery Anderson’s, The Development of the LDS Temple Worship, 1846-2000 and came upon the passage on pg 224.

Quote:

Dr. Fred Clawson called and asked permission to give a recommend to J—A. G

---

and his wife to witness the marriage of their daughter. I told him I would give him and answer later in the day. J—is full-tithe payer and has been for years, but on account of the use of tobacco has never had a recommend to the temple. I think he is a man of absolute honesty and integrity, and personally I have no objection to his witnessing the marriage of his daughter in the temple. Heber J. Grant diary, October 31, 1929.

It would be nice if these things could be taken case by case as this one was.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

I agree they are smart men, SD, and I also believe they discuss policies in depth in councils before making any change. I’m also sure they are sometimes blind to the way things are outside the Mormon Corridor (although I see significant change in that respect). I would bet when this policy was made (When was it made?) they did not thoroughly consider the impact it might have on families with many non-members because that was unusual in the MC. Some of that impact, as has been noted here, has been a bitterness toward the church by those non-member parents, siblings, etc., who have been excluded from a major life event and as a result want to have absolutely nothing to do with the church. A change could vastly improve the image of the church in these situations and actually help the missionary effort – that has to be part of the discussion.

Amen!

[Anonymous]

l married my husband civilly first since he had only been a member for a few months and there really was no reason to wait.

And you know…I’m SO glad that I did.

SO glad.

I now have a wedding video that I can show my children.

My husband had “that moment” when he saw me turn the corner to walk down the aisle.

His father was his best man.

We actually spoke vows and we used rings IN the ceremony to symbolize those vows. (gasp!)

Thankfully we avoided drama with the in-laws and we were all blissfully happy.

The more I think of it, the more I’m so, so glad that we waited to be sealed. We had a year to ourselves to explore each other more. When we finally went to the temple for our own endowments, we went as a couple…we drove ourselves there…we talked about it as we drove…it was “our” thing (and while I don’t care for the temple ceremonies so much now, it was new and exciting at the time).

My children are not yet old enough to get married, but the time will come for them…and when it does, you better believe that I’ll encourage and support a civil ceremony first.

I don’t understand the frantic rush to be sealed anyway. What isn’t done on earth can be done posthumously, right?

Anyway, I would like to see the church leadership relax its stance on this one year waiting time. It is like a punishment for those who don’t obey “their rules”.

[Author]

Posts