Let's here about the newest revelation from the seer...after the letter writing campaign...and btw, I called this (or really the change in mormon weddings) a while back
"Recently, a group of Mormons launched a letter-writing campaign asking for a change. "We are collecting emails, stories and letters," organizers at familyfirstweddings.com write, "to help format a letter that will be sent, through official channels, to our leaders in Salt Lake City.""
Hahaha. My kimball era parents are going to be pissed. They had to shun both their parents from their wedding cus one side was Jack mo and the other side was nevermo. Wow times have changed.
Dehlin thinks they are doing this to avoid anti discrimination lawsuits? All churches have had carte Blanche about who they choose to marry. LDS Inc won't let coffee drinkers get married in the temple, fer crying out loud.
This is not about teh gays and lawyers. It is about discontent among the rank and file about this anti-family policy.
Well from what's been discussed from insiders on here and other boards, there is definitely an ulterior motive behind the surface reason. Always gotta look last the surface with the lds church!!
I don't get the connection. What has same sex civil marriage (which Churches will NOT be forced to do) got anything to do with the wait policy which was mostly enforced in the US?
"For many families, that makes for an exclusive rather than inclusive celebration." - OMG! I feel a revelation coming on!!! Tommy will have a revelation right before he leaves for England, just watch. Then TBMs will have that to focus on rather then him in court. Their revelations are also SO CONVENIENT timewise.
I wouldn't think this will be too radical. I'm sure that it will be required that the couple still have an LDS civil ceremony by an LDS bishop, in an LDS chapel, none of that outdoors country club wedding stuff. Also, immediately following the civil ceremony, the couple will have to go straight to the temple for sealing.
Yeah, the wording of this is suspicious. I'm thinking it still doesn't mean you can have a unique wedding or write your own vows or have harp music or go on your honeymoon and then come back and have a sealing or anything you want. God, this is one I hope I'm wrong on. They still won't want to relinquish control.
I could see them saying that it has to be done by a bishop using the UGLY mormon wedding language. Then you have to go to the temple the same day. No frucking without a sealing or you're back to the year's wait. That way they can still humiliate the people who can't go with the wedding party for the "important" part of the wedding day. So maybe they can still keep people paying to avoid disappointing the wedding couple. C And as with all Mo policies, as long as it works for the people in Utah, who cares how hard it is for people in Arkansas. I will really be pissed if that's what they do and then try to spin it as some great thing they are doing for families. And claim that since the missionary work is hastening, there are SO many converts now with non-Mormon family so they are being compassionate.
They will never admit that there are SO many former TBMs who have resigned that create a big increase in family members who can't attend weddings and we are creating bad press for them by focusing attention on their deplorable wedding policies where nevermo families didn't make too many waves.
My biggest regret in life is that my parents, hell my whole family, were unable to see me get married. I still can't even think about it without crying. Instead, my in laws that I met the day before who I have zero relationship with, were able to share in that day. I can pretty much let go of all the shitty stuff the church has put me through (lots of therapy), but not this. I'll never get that day back.
Seriously, fuck the church. I hope it goes down in flames.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/2014 01:24AM by goldenrule.
Me too, goldenrule. I'm just furious that my dad couldn't be at my wedding, although my TBM mom swears he didn't mind because he knows that's how Mormon weddings are done. I wanted to have a vow renewal on one of our anniversaries but when I tried planning it, literally everyone BUT my dad acted as if I'd tried to feed them sour milk. DH thought it was a waste of money, DD was in her embarrassed tweenager stage, my mom thought I was mocking my temple vows, my sister said she'd come but sounded bored by the idea and my in-laws looked at me like I'd started speaking Chinese and they literally couldn't comprehend. The only one who supported me, because he knew what it meant to me was my teenage son, who has since gotten his license online to marry people and when he turns 18, he's determined to talk us into letting him do the vow renewal (apparently it's not legal until he is, although I told him I doubted it mattered in a vow renewal.)
Anyway, the point is - the church stole that day from me and I can't get it back. If they change now, I'll only be glad for those who aren't going to be mistreated the way I was - it won't fix things for me. But I don't want anyone to go through the dilemma we did, golden, so I hope they change, even though I agree with your sentiment and hope they go down in flames.
the temple marriage experience. When faced with the reality that most non-Mormon weddings do, in fact even surpass it, they come unglued.
Case in point the most recent (UK)royal wedding. Faced with the most splendidly gorgeous pomp, pageantry and— dare I say it?—spirituality, the constant chatter from TBM women about how more "special" a temple wedding is-with their fiances as their princes and the temple as their castle (or cathedral) was deafening and very revealing.
They are insecure and operating with a high level of cog dis; therefore the only way to prevent their mental and psychological shelves from collapsing is to diss your mention of a vow renewal.
"... We are gathered here today in this gymnasium (they won't let them use the chapel, I'm sure) to join this couple FOR TIME ONLY, in the presence of all those who are unworthy and cannot witness their REAL wedding in the Temple of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints...with the understanding that this is just a prelude to the enormously important sealing that will take place in The Temple Of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day saints, yea, this very evening (instead of a reception) when the couple will repeat their TRUE wedding vows in the ONLY TRUE words, under the NEW AND EVERLASTING COVENANT...and we are grateful this day that a few chosen loved ones will witness this sacred Temple Sealing in the Temple of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints. In the meantime, this worthy couple has opted to add this little pre-wedding ceremony as a condescension to those who are too young, or are not members, or are not able to live up to the standards of The Temple of The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Ladder-day saints. As a step toward your REAL Eternal Sealing for eternity this day, I now pronounce you man and wife FOR TIME ONLY."
Bla-bla. Trust me. No one--ever--wants to be married by a bishop. Yes, your 17-going-on-18-online-officiator would be much, much better.
Yeah the average LDS chapel rameumptum isn't designed for ceremonies or any two way dialogue. All civil LDS weddings I've been to as well take place in the wonderful and marvellous gym.
I have doubts that they will really make this change. Although I agree with other posters, that if they do it will be kept under strict control by TSCC.
For there to be meaningful change, there needs to be a change in Mormon culture. I think the option of marrying first in a setting where everyone you love can be included will still be demeaned as a lesser choice for the less faithful.
The change, if it happens, won't be because it is simply the right thing to do.
They won't apologize, they won't acknowledge the damage they have caused, they will simply sweep it away and future TBMs won't believe that this was ever the practice.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/2014 08:34AM by caedmon.
I agree if they do this, they will only do it with the stipulation that the civil ceremony has to be in the great and spacious gym. This is for 2 reasons.
1) To keep the faithful from getting pissed off. My grandparents didn't get to go to my parent's or siblings' weddings, and it is still a source of hurt in the family. Nor did I get to go to my siblings' weddings. What are the "faithful" like my parents and siblings supposed to think if all the sudden policy allows a big beautiful ceremony with everyone included?
2) THE BIG REASON: TO KEEP THE TEMPLE CEREMONY FROM LOOKING LIKE THE JOKE IT IS. If you do the civil ceremony in the gym, then even the temple ceremony couldn't be worse. But imagine if you allow a big, beautiful wedding to take place.... The wedding happens in a gorgeous setting, the bride gets to wear her beautiful gown, there are flowers and lovely music, there are hundreds of smiling people, wise words are spoken by the officiator, everyone throws rice and wishes the couple well.... And then the couple goes to the temple, puts on pillsbury doughboy clothes and baker's hats, plays rock-paper-scissors, and then has their 20 minute sealing (by a 90 year-old with bad breath) after which they are shoo-ed out by the temple matron to get the next couple in. TALK ABOUT COG-DIS!!!! These couples would be going, "wait WTF?" It would totally expose to them how beautiful their temple experience was NOT by comparison, and make them start asking some serious questions.
Rock, paper, scissors. I love it! I've only been to one Mormon temple sealing and I remember thinking how awkward and formulaic it is. I would never wear that awful hat to my wedding--no thank you!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/2014 09:55AM by fletch31.
I had to watch my wife say goodbye to her parents who now I am closer to then my own. I made sure I told DW about this today so the church couldnt get the credit for the "revelation" when it comes out.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/2014 09:27AM by thematrix.
Lots of good thoughts already posted. I wouldn't be surprised if they were looking for something "big" to distract from TSM having to answer to fraud charges.
I also wonder if there has been some "murmuring" after everybody found out that when Mitt and Ann Romney got married, they had a nice, public wedding that her nevermo family could all attend. Then they went to the temple the next day for the sealing. I wonder if people started asking themselves why the Romneys didn't have to wait a year.
Agree with everything you said. It could be a big announcement that has all the members praising Monson, to distract them from what the rest of the world thinks. Personally, I think for their sake, the smart move is to make parts of the temples into chapels and say "You have to get your civil marriage there - invite who you want. Then the "worthy" people will straight upstairs for the sealing." That does two things. It keeps the snotty cultural reasons for a temple sealing in tact (i.e. the better people are going upstairs now) and traps the non-LDS people on temple square to be victimized by the missionaries.
but will couples HAVE TO get married civilly before the temple marriage or can they choose to? If they don't have to get married civilly beforehand, I assume many will not have the civil ceremony.
I hope it happens. I am fairly certain my daughter will be getting married sometime in the next 6 to 9 months and I'd like to see it happen. BUT if they have to get married in the gym--No. I'd prefer they got married at the justice of the peace than in the gym. For my daughter, MOST of her family will be OUTSIDE (all exmos).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/12/2014 09:58AM by cl2.