Jump to content

No more time-only marriages in the temple


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

And HappyJackWagon.

He was a bishop and not just a counselor?  Can I have a confirmation on that so hopefully having no doubt about it will fix the fact in my head. 

Link to comment
Just now, Teancum said:

Teancum was a Bishop as well.😁

I can’t believe I forgot you. I blame the Devil’s Lettuce (nice to have something to blame rather than age or dementia).

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, Calm said:

I can’t believe I forgot you. I blame the Devil’s Lettuce (nice to have something to blame rather than age or dementia).

Ah well I am aging and forget all sorts of things these days. So no problem.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Teancum said:

Ah well I am aging and forget all sorts of things these days. So no problem.

I forgot that, as well. Sorry, Bishop. (That was me appealing to authority.)

Link to comment
23 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What if one chooses a partner who wants the marriage to be in the temple and they decide together that’s how it will be? 

I wonder if you will be able to support one of your children making the opposite decision without counseling them that they are making a less than ideal choice. 

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It is obvious that a temple marriage is still the ideal. 

Obvious in what way? I can tell that you think it is the ideal. But your opinion is, in the end, your opinion.  In the previous wording for Time-only weddings in the temple, the word "encouraged" was used when speaking of members who could not be sealed together. That use of the word tended toward TO weddings being the ideal, or preferred, under the circumstances. But despite ample opportunity of making a similar nod towards idealism or preference, it was not done.

This suggests to me that they have made a conscious effort to avoid expressing a preference. 

 

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Calm said:

having them separate would have increased the sacred sense of the temple sealing as the wedding

I agree, but here in the UK with civil-before-temple weddings it is still possible for people to feel excluded. "Sure," says the irascible grandpa who can't give up his morning and evening tea, "it's nice that I can attend the civil wedding, but I'm being excluded from the most important part: the sealing for eternity!!"

There will be those who complain no matter what.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Stargazer said:

I agree, but here in the UK with civil-before-temple weddings it is still possible for people to feel excluded. "Sure," says the irascible grandpa who can't give up his morning and evening tea, "it's nice that I can attend the civil wedding, but I'm being excluded from the most important part: the sealing for eternity!!"

There will be those who complain no matter what.

There will always be people who complain even if they can attend.  There are often reasonable reasons to complain such as choice of temple for the drama/looks if it is hard to get to for many invitees or tacky or expensive one time use bridesmaids’ dresses for temple photoshoots or being expected to go to rehearsals when you aren’t actually participating by more than just standing there in a line when you have a big exam the next day you need to study for...but if you are nice, you mutter to your spouse or roommate (as long as they aren’t the bride or groom) and go ahead and do what the couple has asked you to do if you can manage it. 
 

Imo, when it comes to the wedding and sealing and all the drama surrounding it, the important thing is that the bride and groom come out of it feeling good and not primarily exhausted or frustrated.  I hope these days more couples are doing what they need and not just going along because it is expected of them. That, I think, will be the best way for couples to have a chance to have their ideal sacred marriage. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
23 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The clear impression I get from the policy as recently amended is that the preference is still to have the marriage performed inside the temple. 
 

But feel free to regard me as on “shaky ground” if it makes you comfortable. 
 

Added later: And no authority has EVER said you’re “supposed” to address a former bishop as “Bishop.” Are you serious about that? 

I regret ever mentioning that I was ever a bishop.  Today, looking back, it was meaningless and hypocritical.

Link to comment
Just now, Bob Crockett said:

I regret ever mentioning that I was ever a bishop.  Today, looking back, it was meaningless and hypocritical.

I shouldn’t have mentioned it. Sorry. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

My fault. Some day we should get together.  I live in Draper half time. 

I’m in Ohio these days. If I’m ever out west, that would be nice. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

I’m in Ohio these days. If I’m ever out west, that would be nice. 

Kirtland area?

That’s one prominent Church history locale I’ve never visited. 
 

That and Palmyra — though I did come close a few years ago when I covered the dedication of the new Priesthood Restoration Site in Harmony, Pa. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Kirtland area?

That’s one prominent Church history locale I’ve never visited. 
 

That and Palmyra — though I did come close a few years ago when I covered the dedication of the new Priesthood Restoration Site in Harmony, Pa. 

Dayton. My daughter and I toured Kirtland two summers ago. Kind of fun to see where our ancestors lived. It’s about 3 hours northeast of here. 

Edited by jkwilliams
Link to comment
4 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Dayton. My daughter and I toured Kirtland two summers ago. Kind of fun to see where our ancestors lived. It’s about 3 hours northeast of here. 

When you said Dayton, the Scopes monkey trial emerged in the back of my mind. Then I realized that happened in Dayton, Tennessee. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When you said Dayton, the Scopes monkey trial emerged in the back of my mind. Then I realized that happened in Dayton, Tennessee. 

I served there; second area of my mission.

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When you said Dayton, the Scopes monkey trial emerged in the back of my mind. Then I realized that happened in Dayton, Tennessee. 

Nope, home of the Wright brothers and "birthplace of aviation."

Edited by jkwilliams
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Kirtland area?

That’s one prominent Church history locale I’ve never visited. 
 

That and Palmyra — though I did come close a few years ago when I covered the dedication of the new Priesthood Restoration Site in Harmony, Pa. 

I had a couple of hours to kill on a business trip to Cleveland and I went out to see the Temple.   It was closed even though I arrived hours before it was supposed to close for the day.

I was really stunned by the size of the building (large) and the whiteness of its exterior stucco.  A lot more than I expected.   When built it must have been an impressive structure.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

I had a couple of hours to kill on a business trip to Cleveland and I went out to see the Temple.   It was closed even though I arrived hours before it was supposed to close for the day.

I was really stunned by the size of the building (large) and the whiteness of its exterior stucco.  A lot more than I expected.   When built it must have been an impressive structure.

The Community of Christ (formerly the RLDS Church) owns the temple and keeps rather tight control over it, including how images of it are used. 
 

Some years ago, when I was working for the Church News, we covered a landmark anniversary of the temple’s construction. I contacted the C of C to request permission to publish an exterior picture of the temple. They were very nice and not only granted permission but shot pictures themselves of leaders of our church holding a commemorative service inside the temple. These they provided to us without charge. 
 

I had a pretty good relationship at the time with Lachlan McKay, their director of historic sites, who is today one of the apostles in that faith. 

Link to comment
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The Community of Christ (formerly the RLDS Church) owns the temple and keeps rather tight control over it, including how images of it are used. 
 

Some years ago, when I was working for the Church News, we covered a landmark anniversary of the temple’s construction. I contacted the C of C to request permission to publish an exterior picture of the temple. They were very nice and not only granted permission but shot pictures themselves of leaders of our church holding a commemorative service inside the temple. These they provided to us without charge. 
 

I had a pretty good relationship at the time with Lachlan McKay, their director of historic sites, who is today one of the apostles in that faith. 

Which is all interesting given that the owners of the temple before the RLDS church used to house cattle in the building. Or am I thinking about the Nauvoo Temple?

Edited by Bob Crockett
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...