Pushing a Couple into the Temple

By: Robert Kirby
Tribune columnist, (and a Mormon)

My nephew got married on Thursday. Even though he was raised LDS, it wasn't the traditional Mormon temple marriage. He married someone of another faith. So of course we boycotted the wedding.
I'm kidding. We went. Family is important. Bride and groom looked happy together. But the fact that they're young also makes them relatively clueless. They'll need all the family support they can get to make it work.
Not everyone gets that support. Last week, while riding TRAX, I listened (no choice really) as two couples across the aisle discussed the future weddings of their daughters.
The couples were active LDS Church members. A major clue was the voluble agreement that they would not pay for the weddings if said daughters didn't get married in the temple.
One couple said their daughter could just go to a justice of the peace during her lunch hour. The other said they might give their daughter bus fare to Vegas. Then they complimented each other on defending the faith.
I was pleased as well.
Among the unexpected benefits of riding TRAX are such occasional reminders that I'm not the stupidest person in the world.
It's been a while since I heard that "temple or nothing" wedding stuff. I thought it had gone the way of that dim-witted pronouncement of "better a dead daughter than a sexually violated one."

But a few days later, a friend said her mother had refused to let her get married in her grandmother's wedding dress when she found out it wouldn't be a temple marriage.
Gambling is technically a sin, but I'd still be willing to bet that Heavenly Father thinks micromanaging your daughter like that is a bunch of crap. If he were similarly controlling, he wouldn't have let two idiots have a daughter.
The fact that your daughter is getting married at all means she feels ready to start taking adult risks. Ideally, this is also the same time when parents should start thinking harder about shutting up. You make fewer mistakes that way.
This isn't about whether getting married in the temple is important. This is about believing coercion is an acceptable way of getting people there. If you don't believe me, call the temple and ask if you can bring a hostage next time.
You may think you're telling your daughter how important a temple wedding is, but what she's hearing is that she's not as important to you as your personal sense of propriety.
And regardless of how the marriage turns out, years from now, when she's looking back on the most important moment of her life, what she'll remember most about you was your priggish disapproval.

***My Thoughts***

To check out the article, and the 100+ comments left behind, click here

It's nice to know that not all Utah Mormons think the same way. Kirby has some great articles and books out about Mormons and their lifestyles and perceptions. One of my favorites is Sunday of the Living Dead, in which he points out the absurd conventions of the typical Mormon life.

I spend time thinking about my niece's wedding, sometime off in the distant future, where the only people who will be able to attend are her parents, and my mom. Her own little brother will likely miss it, even thought he is Mormon as well, unless he is back from his mission (that he will no doubt be expected to go on) or has received his endowments, he won't even be allowed to witness the 10 minute ceremony. It's a shame that this religion not only restricts non-members from entering the temple, it also denies younger siblings from watching their brothers and sisters get married, just because they would gain knowledge of the green apron, baker's hat (for men), chin-strap veil (for women), and the robes symbolizing the Melchezidek priesthood bestowed upon BOTH men and women when they go through the endowment session. These items are REQUIRED to be worn over the wedding clothes in the sealing room, and therefore, can only be seen by those who have sworn to uphold the secrecy of these clothing items and the covenants made during the endowment session. After all, we can't expect 12 year olds to keep silent on how silly everyone looks in their robes and hats, wearing bright green aprons over their wedding dresses and suits, and practicing the 'patriarchal grip' over the altar as they kneel facing each other. So, they are denied the right to watch a FAMILY SEALING just because of their age.

When I got married, I got a bunch of grief for picking my brother who lived with my Dad over my brother who lived with me as my ring-bearer. I suppose if I had been worthy to have been married in the temple, all those folks who got to attend my wedding wouldn't have been allowed, but neither would ANY of my brothers or sisters, or even my Dad, or his parents, or my husband's brothers and sisters, or ANY of our aunts and uncles and cousins. What kind of family event is it, when only 7 of your side, and 8 of the other can even witness it? How can it possibly be called a 'Family Forever' religion, when the very first thing that happens is a division based on age, membership status, or worthiness?

I am about to officiate a wedding myself in a few days, for a couple who is choosing a Pagan-Wiccan theme for their wedding. The ONLY people who won't be there are the ones who choose NOT to go. For some reason, in the minds of those who are objecting, it isn't a real wedding unless it is held in a church, officiated by a man, and signed off on by a Christian entity. It's their loss, I say. It's going to be a beautiful ceremony, outdoors in a garden spot, surrounded by all the family that cares for them; young, old, believers and skeptics alike. All of that is set aside to witness the event itself, because that should be more important than checking membership cards at the door.