Is the reason only endowed members can attend temple wedding due to Joseph Smith, polygamy and the need for secrecy?

The UK demands weddings be public in case of objections. I don't know about wedding ceremonies elsewhere, but they seem to be celebrations and not about secrets.

Someone stated they wished the hurt and pain temple weddings cause would get wider public attention. How "family friendly" can a church be that bans children and non-members from a wedding ceremony?

I'm also thinking the church would not want temple weddings to be associated with polygamy. But isn't that why they were started?

The original D&C stated that all weddings were to be public events. Non-Mormons attended weddings in the Navoo temple.

You're right that it wasn't until Smith and his inner circle began practicing polygamy that marriage ceremonies were for those on the inside.

And the overriding modern day reason for them is tithing extortion.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2014 04:44PM by 2+2=4.

2+2=4

I love your use of the word "extortion" for that is exactly what it is.

I was trying to remember if there was anything in the actual temple marriage ceremony that a non-member couldn't witness. Its been a long time, but I don't remember anything. This is a new thought on my part. Does anyone remember for sure? I just remember it was awkward and not at all spiritual.

I never went through the temple. (Found out they were serious about the whole underwear thing and headed for the exit.)

Even if there is nothing nonmembers couldn't witness, how would the church get 10% out of them? The ceremony itself is not like a traditional wedding, how would you explain it to nonmembers? Plus, I don't think the church would want anyone not "worthy" in their temples.

I would love to see a actual temple wedding or one portrayed on you tube. (Button camera on a guest?) Mormons are so brain washed, they just don't realize how weird they are. And all for polygamy. Something the church would not want members or nonmembers to know.

> I was trying to remember if there was anything in
> the actual temple marriage ceremony that a
> non-member couldn't witness.

You're in the full regalia and give each other the second token of the MPH, the patriarchal grip, or sure sign of the nail during the ceremony.

Temple weddings are cold impersonal and very quick.

Most if not ALL of your friends and family can't be there. I got married when I was 18. Not one of my siblings or friends had been endowed yet. None of them were there.

Other than having the clown suits on, I couldn't see any reason why anyone couldn't be there. I don't know why they would want to though. There's no music, flowers, friends, decorations, beautiful clothes, attendants, nothing.

My second wedding at the courthouse was way more fun than a temple wedding.

I don't look at it like "I couldn't attend my child's wedding," but rather "Mormons don't have weddings. They replaced them with a ritual ordinance that only worthy tithe-paying mormons can attend."

And.... years ago my fiance and I wanted to avoid the temple crowds. We hoped for a more intimate wedding, errr, I mean sealing, and scheduled it for a Friday. Her bishop actually chastised us because fewer people would be able to go the the temple that day. How dare us... picking our own wedding date at the expense of his ward's temple attendance numbers.