If I Only Had a Brain….
There’s been a lot of furor inside The Salt Lake Tribune opinion pages lately, about the fact that only tithe-paying, faithful Mormons, who hold a valid Temple Recommend, are allowed inside the LDS Temples.
Under most circumstances, non- and ex-Mormons could care less. They have no desire to go inside and participate in the “sacred not secret” rituals. But then there’s the whole marriage thing. See, young LDS girls and boys are brought up to believe that the only “valid” and acceptable marriage is a temple marriage.
They also are taught that one should not have two marriages–a civil ceremony and a temple marriage–even if some of their family members cannot attend. It doesn’t MATTER who these family members are. Dad’s not a member? Too bad. Mom’s not a member? So sad.
If you don’t accept the fact that the LDS Church is the ONLY true church, you cannot participate in a temple wedding.
SO that’s what the furor is about. Letters have run in the forum supporting both sides. Yesterday, however, there was a doozy. Let me preface this with a disclaimer. If you are going to write to a PUBLIC NEWSPAPER and out yourself as a terminal idiot, with a helpful dose of extreme arrogance, you have to expect to be ridiculed. Here is the letter, as it ran, inside The Trib’s pages.
Church has rights, too
Over the last few weeks I’ve read numerous Public Forum letters about how people are upset because the LDS Church refuses to let anyone and everyone into their temples to see their friends/family/children/whomever get married there.
Has everyone forgotten that the LDS temples are private property? Paid for by private funds? My home is my private property. I can deny anyone I choose entry into my home for any reason. If they enter my home anyway, I can have them arrested for trespassing.
The leadership of the LDS church has every right to decide who can and cannot come into their temples. They consider their temples sacred. They consider the ordinances performed in those temples sacred. They have the right to say to the public that if you want to come into our temples and witness those ordinances, then you have to join our church and live your life according to a certain moral standard.
Everyone who wrote one of those pieces needs to get down off their high horse and realize that the LDS Church has the same rights as they do.
Hilton Harris
Sandy
Gee, ya think Hilton? You are suffering from a classic case of “I’m an arrogant horse’s ass who just doesn’t get it.” See, most of us don’t give a shit WHAT you do inside your temples, Hilton. I agree, they belong to the LDS Church. Just like Brigham Young University. When people get up in arms about the lack of religious and educational freedom at BYU, I just shake my head and say, “It’s so simple. Don’t go there. They OWN the university. They can do as they please.”
But what Hilton just said here is, “IF YOU AIN’T MORMON, you don’t live up to God’s moral standards.”
Don’t believe me? Here it is again, in bold print.
They have the right to say to the public that if you want to come into our temples and witness those ordinances, then you have to join our church and live your life according to a certain moral standard.
Methinks Hilton is SO high up on his HIGH HORSE that he can’t see the forest for the trees. (Warning: cliche alert!)
Those of us who do not believe Mormonism to be true, at least in Hilton’s viewpoint, do not have any right to expect to participate in the same things the true believing Saints get to participate in. And apparently, it is all about morality. Oddly enough, I know a lot of moral Christian people who are not Mormon. They don’t wear the magic underoos, though, and I guess that’s the morality Hilton is looking for.
Apparently, not cheating on your spouse, reading the Bible and teaching your chidren Christian values is not enough.
Truly, the whole thing would be a non-issue if the Church directives did not specifically say “You cannot have two ceremonies. Just one. In the temple.” See, then, most of us again would say, “We don’t care. It’s your church. It’s your temple. Do as you want.”
But we are talking about families here. Mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers and best friends. People that are being told that because they are not MORMON, they are not good enough to see their child/sibling/friend be married. A little bit of compassion and understanding from the LDS Church in this matter would go a very long way in soothing this rift that has long existed between the Mormons and everyone else.
The allowance of a civil ceremony in addition to a temple sealing is the obvious solution. Both sides get what they want.
But Hilton pretty much told you how many Mormons feel about that. In fact, many times, those who do choose a civil ceremony first must wait a year before attending the temple.
Now, me, I have no desire for a temple wedding. Time and all eternity is a long time to spend with another human being who cannot put paper towels on the roll, thinks farting and burping is an Olympic sport, and thinks duct tape is a viable patching tool for all manner of things, including sofas, kitchen plumbing and possibly surgery.
Not only that, but the whole ritualistic thing freaks me out. But I respect that others might want to put on a toga and fig leaf apron over their lovely, but modest, wedding dress and recite strange oaths. Whatever floats your boat.
But a little consideration given to those who don’t believe the same as Mormons would go a long way.
Hilton, on the other hand, is just what the Church does NOT need. A muzzle might be appropriate.
September 19th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
The Church has NEVER said the members cannot have another ceremony. Some do. The reason why some don’t want to is when you are sealed in the Temple of the Lord it is for time and all eternity and you are sealed by a preisthood holder who has the authority from God to seal you together forever, not just until time parts us. Nothing can compare to a temple ceremony, so why have another one. I am about to be married for the first time in the Chicago Temple. I couldn’t imagine not having my husband forever, not just on earth. Only my immediate family are members of the church, and we love and respect all our non-member family members. They of course cannot enter the temple of the Lord right now in there lives, but I will have a short ring ceremony at my reception and explain to them the importance of marraige in the Lords house. Members are not on high horses or think those who cannot enter are not righteous or good people. Of course this is not true in anyway. But, it is true that the temple is a sacred place of the Lord. In it are the most sacred ordinances done on this earth. Those who enter must be prepared and must be worthy to receive those blessings the Lord has prepared for them in His house. Anyone can one day be worthy to enter and the Lord wants all of His children to one day be worthy to enter.
February 24th, 2007 at 2:09 am
One thing you have to understand is that the LDS church believes strongly that the temple is a holy place and that one must follow the guidelines, not given by the leaders of the church, but by god, so that they may be worthy of entering. The rules and laws that dictate who can and who can not enter the temple has been given by the prophets both of ancient times and these latter days who are guided directly by god. Worthiness is about 99% of being able to enter into a temple. The other 1% is having the gift of the holy spirit with you which can only be permanantly given if one is baptized of water and of the spirit.
March 9th, 2007 at 12:41 am
I totally agree with you. Latter-day Saints should have two ceremonies if there are close family members who cannot attend a temple ceremony. I myself am having two ceremonies on the same day because I am the only member of my family. I will be sealed in the Temple first, and then that very afternoon, I will have a civil demonstration that satisfies my family’s needs, and finally a HUGE reception. It will be a terribly long day for ME, but I want my family to be happy too. The church most definatly does not discourage civil ceremonies performed after the temple ceremonies. I don’t know where you heard that from. SO MANY MORMONS DO IT!! I live on the east coast where I guess we’re a bit more relaxed than in Utah about certain non-doctrinal but widely believed issues (for instance we DO drink caffeine out here). I’m terribly sorry if someone close to you was discouraged from having a civil ceremony by their family or bishop or whomever. It was not right of that person to do so. I hope you’re opinion about our church isn’t sullied forever. I joined this church 3.5 years ago where I met my fiance. It was the best decision of my entire life. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with your standards, whatever they may be. Just as long as YOU live up to them.
Let in the Love
March 23rd, 2007 at 9:31 pm
A comment on what Robin said… From my Midwestern neck of the woods I don’t see anyone doing a second ceremony. You are right that the Church does not say you can’t. No, instead they make you feel really guilty if you do. I love the Church. But this issue has always bothered me. I really feel that the brethren don’t understand. You don’t realize how much pain and ruin you put a non-member family through. It’s very damaging. It hurts everyone involved. It leaves emotional scares. I wish you could point to some Church material that says in some instances two weddings would be ok. Because lds.org just does not reveal that to me. This is one of the singular issues I think that hold back the Church in some areas. And not for a moral reason really. It’s just Mom’s and Dad’s of their children want to see them get Married. That’s not a bad thing to want. I wish I saw the support you task about. I just don’t see it.
March 31st, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Wow, I never realized the hostility some people feel from the church about post-sealing civil ceremonies. I have never heard a discouraging remark from any member about my choice to have a civil demonstration, even my bishop supports it. Again, perhaps that is because I live in the east……I don’t know. I’m incredibly sorry. Just remember, while some members’ parents are discouraging them from a civil ceremony, there are other parents, like mine, who discourage their children from having temple ceremonies, which is pretty hard to deal with too. I think some members and perhaps some leaders view civil ceremonies as a pollutant to the commitments made at the sealing ceremony. I think that this may be true in some rare circumstances, but when it comes down to it, it’s up to the discretion of the couple. Don’t let other members’ opinions about what’s right or wrong discourage YOU from doing your part in trying to bring your family together. One thing I’ve learned since joining is that there will always be some Mormon somewhere telling me that I’m doing something wrong. But that’s where personal revelation and free agency take center stage. Do what you know to be right for yourself. It’s really that simple.