Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rain

Sealings can be done right away now!

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Gray said:

It has no effect either way.

This change would not have come if the Church did not think it did or would at some point in the future.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

This change would not have come if the Church did not think it did or would at some point in the future.

Are you an apostle or privy to the discussions of the First Presidency or the Twelve? If not, you really should not make blanket statements about their motives.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I think it is also great to have a uniform policy that works worldwide. This was never a “doctrinal” issue. I feel many changes in policy that have occurred and the new youth programs will also make things more consistent country to country.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

This change would not have come if the Church did not think it did or would at some point in the future.

If that's true they need to fire their legal counsel, because they don't know what they're talking about.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Rain said:

We are happy as well. My daughter is of marriage age and has worried about in the future not having loved ones there.

The wording is interesting to me:

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced Monday that a civil marriage between a man and a woman will no longer necessitate waiting a year for that couple to be to married (or sealed) in a temple. "

Are we saying some couples will do civil marriages and then temple marriages, but not sealings?  I know temple marriages without sealings happen, but didn't know there was a wait after civil marriages nor did I ever hearing anyone wanting to do both without the sealing.

 

I thought I heard that they stopped doing marriages for time only in the temple a while ago?  Maybe I misunderstood though.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

My two cents worth.  It has been the law in the United Kingdom for a long time that a marriage must be performed in a public place.  So yeah you marry then go to the Temple right after,  this has been like this forever here.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Rain said:

This is really unfortunate.  This policy was always a fantastic way to keep young people focussed on what mattered.  

I predict a massive drop off in young LDS deciding to get sealed ** at all **.  I think @Scott Lloyd would agree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

This is really unfortunate.  This policy was always a fantastic way to keep young people focussed on what mattered.  

I predict a massive drop off in young LDS deciding to get sealed ** at all **.  I think @Scott Lloyd would agree.

The announcement states it’s a Global Standard because many countries don’t recognize a religious ceremony as a legal marriage. So why would removing the one-year wait to be sealed in The Temple cause a massive drop in young marrieds getting sealed? 🙄

The new policy sets a single global standard for Latter-day Saints around the world. The Church has observed this practice for many years in more than half of the countries where the worldwide faith resides. In those countries, couples are required by law to marry civilly first.”

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

This is really unfortunate.  This policy was always a fantastic way to keep young people focussed on what mattered.  

I predict a massive drop off in young LDS deciding to get sealed ** at all **.  I think @Scott Lloyd would agree.

I disagree. :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I thought I heard that they stopped doing marriages for time only in the temple a while ago?  Maybe I misunderstood though.  

I heard it ended too but recently I have heard of them again.

Okay, I looked it up in the handbook and there are a lot of restrictions on when you can be married for time in the temple that did not exist in the past. In short, both must already be sealed to a deceased spouse, neither can have secured a divorce while they were a church member, marriages in a temple have to be legally binding in that country, and a bunch of no-brained administrative requirements that are obvious.

I am guessing they stopped it and reintroduced it with the new restrictions as previously I have attended temple “time only” marriages in the temple that did not meet those requirements. Seems a good set of restrictions to me.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I heard it ended too but recently I have heard of them again.

Okay, I looked it up in the handbook and there are a lot of restrictions on when you can be married for time in the temple that did not exist in the past. In short, both must already be sealed to a deceased spouse, neither can have secured a divorce while they were a church member, marriages in a temple have to be legally binding in that country, and a bunch of no-brained administrative requirements that are obvious.

I am guessing they stopped it and reintroduced it with the new restrictions as previously I have attended temple “time only” marriages in the temple that did not meet those requirements. Seems a good set of restrictions to me.

What are time only temple marriages?

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, The Nehor said:

That would be a good thing. If you are willing to give up a temple sealing because you consider it unimportant compared to the relative tinsel of a big social wedding then you probably should not be entering into those covenants anyway.

My only concern is that couples will focus on the big social wedding and do the sealing as an afterthought. That is their choice though and I am noticing that church policies lately have been giving us more rope to hang ourselves with if we choose.

Please pass the rope.  I like being treated like the adult I’ve earned the wrinkles to be. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

My two cents worth.  It has been the law in the United Kingdom for a long time that a marriage must be performed in a public place.  So yeah you marry then go to the Temple right after,  this has been like this forever here.

Not only there, but wherever local laws require this.  Typically, the "State Wedding" happens in a government building before a government official.  Thence, where geography permits, the wedding party goes to the Church, or in our case, Temple, same day.  Where geography doesn't permit same day, a change was made within the last few years to have a few days gap between State Wedding and Temple Wedding, but if the gap in time was too long, a whole year was required.  Now it appears to me that this has been regularized throughout the Church:  gaps no longer relevant, requiring a whole year's wait until the sealing is permitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

What are time only temple marriages?

Sealings that are not for eternity.  They are mainly done because a woman is already sealed to a husband who's passed away, but wishes to still have her second "wedding" done in the temple.  Then she is sealed to her next husband for time only rather than for time and eternity.  

I have read though where now a few exceptions have been made where women have been allowed to be sealed to more than one man for eternity.  

(It can definitely be confusing).

 

Edited by ALarson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

This is really unfortunate.  This policy was always a fantastic way to keep young people focussed on what mattered.  

I predict a massive drop off in young LDS deciding to get sealed ** at all **.  I think @Scott Lloyd would agree.

Why would there be a massive drop off in young LDS getting sealed?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

What are time only temple marriages?

It is a marriage without a sealing. The marriage ends at death.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, rockpond said:

My nephew is getting married in three weeks (in the USA).  Much of his family will be excluded from the ceremony because they are not temple recommend holders.  Both he and his bride are endowed and wanted to be sealed but were told that a civil wedding would require a one year wait to be sealed.

Show them this article, they might find it helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Please pass the rope.  I like being treated like the adult I’ve earned the wrinkles to be. 

I wasn’t complaining. I think those who follow the prophet’s counsel and seek the Spirit and revelation will rise to greater spiritual heights while those who were relying endlessly on training wheels to keep them spiritually alive will fall.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That would be a good thing. If you are willing to give up a temple sealing because you consider it unimportant compared to the relative tinsel of a big social wedding then you probably should not be entering into those covenants anyway.

My only concern is that couples will focus on the big social wedding and do the sealing as an afterthought. That is their choice though and I am noticing that church policies lately have been giving us more rope to hang ourselves with if we choose.

I definitely believe this will take the pressure off the youth to have to have their wedding in the temple.  I don't know if it will result in fewer actually making it to the temple....but that may be a result of this.

I was talking to my Father about this just a few minutes ago (he's an old timer Mormon :) ), and he shook his head and said,   "They're just making it easier and easier on these kids to keep them happy and hopefully keep them in the church."  He may be right, but I fully support this change.

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Show them this article, they might find it helpful.

First thing I did when I saw it.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is a marriage without a sealing. The marriage ends at death.

Isn't there still a sealing performed?  Or has that changed?

I know my Grandfather was sealed for time only to his second wife and it took place in the Salt Lake temple.  

If it's not a sealing, what is the ceremony like (if you know)?

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Sealings that are not for eternity.  They are mainly done because a woman is already sealed to a husband who's passed away, but wishes to still have her second "wedding" done in the temple.  Then she is sealed to her next husband for time only rather than for time and eternity.  

I have read though where now a few exceptions have been made where women have been allowed to be sealed to more than one man for eternity.  

(It can definitely be confusing).

 

 

8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It is a marriage without a sealing. The marriage ends at death.

Interesting. I always learn something new :)

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...