Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued
Posted: 06 May 2019, 15:56
Discussing Alternate Ways to Stay In the Church
dande48 wrote: ↑06 May 2019, 13:43Or like in grade school, when a bully comes up to you and apologizes and hands you a cupcake... it might be a fine cupcake. They might be genuinely sorry. But I wouldn't blame anyone if their knee-jerk reaction in "Why are you being nice to me? What's your angle?! What are you trying to pull?!"
I imagine the scenario where family waits outside while a couple both gets married and sealed inside a temple will continue to play out in the majority of cases where a couple intends to be sealed. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see many orthodox couples opting to have a public civil marriage and later sealing in the temple to accommodate children (younger siblings, cousins, friends, nieces, nephews). Parents and grandparents might be a different story, depending on the relationships and circumstances.mom3 wrote: ↑06 May 2019, 14:36This was one of my double struggles 30+ years ago. Grandparents that I loved could not attend. But I'd grown up with that. My mom, their only child, married in the temple. They didn't even go to the building and wait.We tend to forget about the younger kids in all of this.
But when it came time and my 4 year old sister and my dearest baby brother (just 2 years younger than me) couldn't come - even though I knew it all my life - it stung. We knew it happened for everyone, but somehow on the day "my entire family' wasn't in the room that was supposed to mimic all of eternity.
For my siblings alone, if this choice had been available, I would have taken it. Then done the sealing as a date night.
At least the power is now given to the couple getting married to make the determination.Where possible, leaders should encourage couples to be both married and sealed in the temple. Where a licensed marriage is not permitted in the temple, or when a temple marriage would cause parents or immediate family members to feel excluded, a civil ceremony followed by a temple sealing is authorized.
I suspect this will be handled on an individual level, and believe most bishops will happily grant temple recommends to couples who choose to marry civilly for pretty much any reason -- as long as they otherwise meet the requirements for a temple recommend. I think they want to unite even extended families to the degree possible and aren't going to dray the line at "parents only."SilentDawning wrote: ↑06 May 2019, 10:17So, the main reason appears to be family unity. But only family unity at the immediate level. If the single temple ceremony will cause disharmony among grandparents, or aunts and uncles, then the policy doesn't apply. I wish it said it was at the preference of the couple for reasons of harmony.Where possible, leaders should encourage couples to be both married and seal in the temple. Where a licensed marriage is not permitted in the temple, or when a temple marriage would cause parents or immediate family members to feel excluded, a civil ceremony followed by a temple sealing is authorized.
We anticipate that this will provide more opportunities for families to come together in love and unity during the special time of marriage and sealing of a man and a women.
@Mom3, I'm glad you acknowledged this. I'm sad that other people's shelves are cracking now. And conflicted and both glad, but really sad this reversal shows the policy for what it was -- a bunch of arrogant crap.mom3 wrote: ↑06 May 2019, 10:46Well SD - Conflicted or not, you got your wish.
As I search online, many people are in your boat. TBM's whose shelves are cracking big time. I don't think your alone in your grief. The first conversations my husband and I had about it all centered around parents who didn't/couldn't have family with them on their day. For my generation it moved into Grandparents who couldn't/wouldn't come.