Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Public forum for topics that don't fit into the other categories.
User avatar
Rumin8
Posts: 85
Joined: 25 Mar 2018, 14:00

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by Rumin8 » 08 May 2019, 19:20

My brother got married on the beach in St Thomas on what he called their “wedding cruise” he and his then fiancé invited friends and family to join them. Any who could were welcome. They did this because she was previously married, widowed, and did not want to cancel her sealing to her first husband for various reasons (all of them good ones).

They arranged for the local branch president to marry them, rented a venue for a few hours for a wedding lunch, and then we got back on the ship. Of my three siblings wedding ceremonies, it was by far the one I remember and appreciate the most.

I’m excited for couples who will now get to experience weddings like this without the pressure or stigma of a non-temple wedding.
"Moderation in all things, especially moderation." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Be excellent to each other." - Abraham Lincoln to Bill & Ted

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7143
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by SilentDawning » 12 May 2019, 12:28

After a period of feeling pretty intense about this change in policy, the emotion has passed for me.

I actually forgot about it until I saw this thread heading a few minutes ago. Happy for the change in policy now. Glad that at least a grandchild, maybe, or my son won't be bound by the old policy. I also have a whole whack of nieces and nephews close to being married, probably in my lifetime if health and accidents don't get me.

This means I can live my life even better as a boundary-setting Mormon and not have to sit out on steps like I did in weddings past -- assuming others go for a civil first wedding.

It will be interesting to see what gives in the future. Do you think it will become a cultural badge to do the civil and temple wedding on the same day, and that people who do it separately will be considered "second class", kind of like how people are sort of disenfranchised if they didn't serve a mission? Or will it become acceptable either way -- a non-issue?
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"Stage 5 is where you no longer believe the gospel as its literally or traditionally taught. Nonetheless, you find your own way to be active and at peace within it". -- SD

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

My introduction: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1576

User avatar
QuestionAbound
Posts: 225
Joined: 13 May 2013, 17:57

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by QuestionAbound » 12 May 2019, 18:46

LOVE this change, but this idea here...

"The Church asks for a simple ceremony"

Why do they think that they have that kind of power and can make that request??

I feel like a marriage ceremony is OUTSIDE of their reach -- or at least, it should be. Kind of like how The Church stopped asking about oral sex in TR interviews (that was before my time). Some things need to be outside of the scope of The Church.

Bishops have a script that they must follow for wedding ceremonies.

I wonder if we will see couples asking their local protestant church leaders to conduct the ceremony and allow script changes.

In my state, couples can marry each other themselves...like, we don't need clergy to do it. I'd like to see a ceremony like that! :clap:

My husband is bishop - I asked if he read the letter to mean that he has power to withhold authorization for a separate marriage/sealing.
He doesn't read it that way, but "someone" is supposed to have that authority. Who?

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 6486
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by DarkJedi » 13 May 2019, 05:39

Yesterday (Mother's Day) we did the missionary call, which has lost a bit of it's luster because it wasn't 5 months since we last talked to him (but it was still great). It was a video call and all the children were on from their various locations. I had sent our missionary a link to the announcement about the policy change and he brought it up. To my utter and great surprise my wife said, "Yeah, I wish this happened before we got married because we would have done it so our families could see us get married." Her orthodox ship has turned of late, but this one still caught me by surprise. The kids are all in favor, BTW, and the missionary son is in a location where there is no readily accessible temple so he said it doesn't really change much for them anyway.
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7143
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by SilentDawning » 13 May 2019, 06:30

QuestionAbound wrote:
12 May 2019, 18:46
LOVE this change, but this idea here...

"The Church asks for a simple ceremony"
I had similar thoughts. They need to get out of the civil marriage business, and I like the analogy with oral sex.

Now, I do get it -- what if couples start writing vows for the civil ceremony? This is common in civil weddings I've attended. The "vows" (the closest word we have in our Mormon sealing is 'covenant') could conflict with the temple ceremony, or at least, represent a loss of control by the LDS leadership over what the couple agree to. And with the church's willingness to tear apart non-member/mem families because the civil wedding "cheapens the temple ceremony" in the past, I could see them being really, really concerned about this.

The vows were the most spiritual part of my sister's wedding I could remember...
Why do they think that they have that kind of power and can make that request??

I feel like a marriage ceremony is OUTSIDE of their reach -- or at least, it should be. Kind of like how The Church stopped asking about oral sex in TR interviews (that was before my time). Some things need to be outside of the scope of The Church.
I partly get their concern about the civil ceremony given how highly held the temple ceremony is. I hope we don't run into uber-orthodox Bishop's getting too involved in the civil side of things, nonetheless.
I wonder if we will see couples asking their local protestant church leaders to conduct the ceremony and allow script changes.
I could see a bride or groom considering this if their non-mem side of the family belongs to one of these other religions and suggests it. The problem I see is that it's tacit acknowledgement of their "priesthood authority" even if they are only performing a civil/for-time wedding.

I know when I was in my 20's I lacked judgment in these matters. After 5 years, feeling really badly that I shut my family out of the experience, I considered a wedding vow renewal for all to attend when we were on vacation. Anyway, my point is that I'm sure the local leadership would discourage this kind of "vow" renewal because that's supposed to happen in the temple when you do sealing for the dead.

But what they don't know won't hurt them, right?
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"Stage 5 is where you no longer believe the gospel as its literally or traditionally taught. Nonetheless, you find your own way to be active and at peace within it". -- SD

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

My introduction: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1576

nibbler
Posts: 4025
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 07:34
Location: Ten miles west of the exact centre of the universe

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by nibbler » 13 May 2019, 08:24

Funerals aren't too dissimilar. If you have a funeral in a LDS building you can expect the service to have a missionary opportunity feel to it. If you get the wrong bishop you may even be limited to how much you can make the funeral about the deceased. Their building, their rules I guess.

If you want to have more control over weddings, funerals, whatever, it's probably best to make plans that take you out of LDS buildings.

User avatar
dande48
Posts: 1443
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:35
Location: Wherever there is danger

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by dande48 » 13 May 2019, 09:33

nibbler wrote:
13 May 2019, 08:24
Funerals aren't too dissimilar. If you have a funeral in a LDS building you can expect the service to have a missionary opportunity feel to it. If you get the wrong bishop you may even be limited to how much you can make the funeral about the deceased. Their building, their rules I guess.

If you want to have more control over weddings, funerals, whatever, it's probably best to make plans that take you out of LDS buildings.
The funeral thing has always bothered me. Or how everything needs to be turned into a "missionary opportunity". It reminds me a lot of MLMs... always selling, always pushing.

The upside of using Church facilities, is its free. It's against Church policy to charge for facility use, which is a HUGE plus for a cheap person like me. I figure, if you're using Church facilities, you aren't too concerned about extravagance. You just want to keep the relatives happy. Our chapels are very utilitarian. If you're looking for an extravagant wedding venue, chances are you were never going to use the chapel anyways. But personally, for a few extra thousand in my pocket, you'd be surprised what I'd put up with.
"The whole world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." - Horace Walpole

"Even though there are no ways of knowing for sure, there are ways of knowing for pretty sure."
-Lemony Snicket

Roy
Posts: 5479
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by Roy » 13 May 2019, 09:46

SilentDawning wrote:
13 May 2019, 06:30
LOVE this change, but this idea here...

"The Church asks for a simple ceremony"
The church has every right to make requests that influence the culture and practices of the membership. That is what churches do!

1) I believe that the church wants for the membership to see the temple sealing as the event that made them husband and wife in the eyes of God. I believe that the church would want the temple sealing to be the event celebrated every year on the anniversary.
2) I believe that the church wants for any civil ceremony to not overshadow the temple ceremony in any way.
3) I believe that the church uses the temple as a significant control mechanism or influence over the youth of the church to live chaste lives and date members of the church.
4) I believe that the church leadership also see much of the weddings industry as an extravagant waste. Our church has for a long time emphasized self-reliance at least to the degree that we avoid unnecessary debt and expenses. They do not want the debt, expense, or competition that tends to exist with secular weddings.

The removal of the waiting period is wonderful in that it cuts out the punitive "teeth" from the church's encouragement in regards to weddings. For couples that wish to do it the most orthodox way possible, they can still do so. For couples that feel that their circumstances should warrant "individual adaptation", they now have more freedom to do so. This policy change is good, good, good.
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

Roy
Posts: 5479
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by Roy » 13 May 2019, 09:50

dande48 wrote:
13 May 2019, 09:33
But personally, for a few extra thousand in my pocket, you'd be surprised what I'd put up with.
I am right there with you! :lol:
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

Codependent
Posts: 4
Joined: 29 Aug 2018, 10:25

Re: Sealing waiting period policy discontinued

Post by Codependent » 13 May 2019, 23:07

Sorry this may not be terribly relevant. I remember right after the revelation granting black people the priesthood the Church News editorial (Mconkie, I believe) was about the folly of interracial marriage. I don’t remember how often or long such counsel persisted, or even that it did publicly. But there was obviously concern by some about controlling the long term impact of the shift. Now interracial marriages may not be overtly encouraged but neither is it overtly, publicly discouraged. I think given time some sort of hybrid wedding will evolve for many. It will be interesting to see what the definitions of simple and extravagant become.

Post Reply