carlimac

I don't think it will have much effect on things. Already two of our kids had a wedding dinner the night before. It was much better than a wedding breakfast after the ceremony like I had.  I doubt the sealing ceremony will take 2-4 hours. Maybe an hour at most. I would expect that brides who haven't served a mission will go through the temple for their endowments before the wedding day like they do now.  Pictures will probably go on as usual ( while the wedding party waits- sometimes hours. MIne did. We were late to our wedding breakfast.)  The choice would have to be made if the pictures will be at the temple or at the wedding venue. But that's not a crisis kind of decision. Nothing like having to exclude parents from the wedding altogether.  Why would a honeymoon have to be abbreviated? ESpecially with temples all over the world and some in prime honeymoon locations like Hawaii? 

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to indicate you specifically were ambivalent about the wedding. But I've read here and on other forums those same words about how it's about the couple and not about the parents. I heartily disagree. I couldn't be more pleased that this doesn't have to be an issue anymore because of Church policy anyway. 

Fair enough.
I do agree that it's about the parents as well, in the sense that the parents are a critical part of the kids' life.  All I'm saying is that it isn't right to cause drama over it if one can't be there... Because the kids hurt too when loved ones can't attend, and that  just makes it worse, and taints the memory of the most important day of their life.

Well I'm sorry he wasn't able to go. I'm not suggesting he didn't want to be there. But I disagree that the wedding day is only about the couple. It is very much about the parents who raised those children, too. 

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to indicate you specifically were ambivalent about the wedding. But I've read here and on other forums those same words about how it's about the couple and not about the parents. I heartily disagree. I couldn't be more pleased that this doesn't have to be an issue anymore because of Church policy anyway. 

Well, actually, the church never has been in the wedding reception business, unless you count the Lion House ( church owned I think) which benefits from all the luncheons and receptions held there.  I would like the Church to even remove the statement that a civil wedding has to be simple and suggest it be done in an LDS chapel. That way the real true focus and the "test" of the couple on their devoutness will be in their going to the temple to be sealed.  I imagine that most couples (who marry in Utah or within an hour or two of a temple) would want to be sealed either the same day or within a day or two so that those temple worthy who came for the wedding can also attend the sealing. But truly, the sealing is the most important, private and intimate part of joining the couple  ( aside from the wedding night) so if the couple wanted to not invite anyone to their sealing, I would completely understand and agree. 
I love the idea of separating the wedding from the sealing. I think it really makes the sealing stand out in ways it didn't before. And it's such a nuisance when the girl insists on wearing her buffont wedding dress to get married in the temple and the robes are awkward over the fluffy dress and things slip and slide and it can be awkward. And when she doesn't wear her dress, the crowd outside the temple has to wait an hour or more while she gets ready to come out of the temple in a dress she didn't even get married in ( but probably paid a hefty price for. It has seemed a funny, bothersome, quirky aspect of LDS wedding traditions.  Now with this new way of doing things it will take some of that silliness out of the picture. 

I don't think it will have much effect on things. Already two of our kids had a wedding dinner the night before. It was much better than a wedding breakfast after the ceremony like I had.  I doubt the sealing ceremony will take 2-4 hours. Maybe an hour at most. I would expect that brides who haven't served a mission will go through the temple for their endowments before the wedding day like they do now.  Pictures will probably go on as usual ( while the wedding party waits- sometimes hours. MIne did. We were late to our wedding breakfast.)  The choice would have to be made if the pictures will be at the temple or at the wedding venue. But that's not a crisis kind of decision. Nothing like having to exclude parents from the wedding altogether.  Why would a honeymoon have to be abbreviated? ESpecially with temples all over the world and some in prime honeymoon locations like Hawaii? 

And just because you see it as a weakness doesn’t mean it is. After all the Lord has revealed this through his prophet. I see this as a wonderful way of healing hearts and drawing families together. 
I’m also excited that younger siblings would be able to attend the wedding. What a great example the couple  can be to their younger siblings as they make the extra effort to go inside the temple for the sealing. It will separate and add importance I believe to the sealing. 
It feels to me like the perfect puzzle piece has been found for the hole in the puzzle. A satisfying perfect fit!

And just because you see it as a weakness doesn’t mean it is. After all the Lord has revealed this through his prophet. I see this as a wonderful way of healing hearts and drawing families together. 
I’m also excited that younger siblings would be able to attend the wedding. What a great example the couple  can be to their younger siblings as they make the extra effort to go inside the temple for the sealing. It will separate and add importance I believe to the sealing. 
It feels to me like the perfect puzzle piece has been found for the hole in the puzzle. A satisfying perfect fit!

I completely disagree and foresee it as a wonderful time to come together with those of other faiths to celebrate the instant the couple becomes married!  I'm almost hoping some of my remaining unmarried kids choose this new option.  I know my son will since he's no longer a part of our faith. But I would cherish the moment, the instant my daughters get married outside the temple. And later reverently thank the Lord in the temple  for the sealing powers that give the couple the opportunity to be together for eternity if they live up to it.  

And it's toppled many a family relationship because they weren't able to be there. With the rings ceremonies afterward ( I've been to many) they feel fake and like a big old compromise. Everyone knows they are already married and  I don't think many take it seriously. It's very anti climactic after the bride and groom have come out of the temple and received lots of congratulations. I can imagine the non-member family feeling short changed.  
 I love that now those who feel so seriously about the civil/legal wedding can be a part of it and the ones who are serous about the temple ceremony can be a part of that. No one need be hurt. 

And it's toppled many a family relationship because they weren't able to be there. With the rings ceremonies afterward ( I've been to many) they feel fake and like a big old compromise. Everyone knows they are already married and  I don't think many take it seriously. It's very anti climactic after the bride and groom have come out of the temple and received lots of congratulations. I can imagine the non-member family feeling short changed.  
 I love that now those who feel so seriously about the civil/legal wedding can be a part of it and the ones who are serous about the temple ceremony can be a part of that. No one need be hurt. 

This seems pretty harsh in relation to the parents or family that couldn't witness the wedding. I think of Sister Marriott who's parents planted the magnolia tree in their yard so that their daughter could be married there later in life. Then she got married without any family  present.
Parents, LDS or not can be  very invested the marriage of their child and I think this is a wonderful change that will help smooth the path for so many families rather than creating offense through exclusion. I would think that most non-member family aren't interested in the temple sealing and wouldn't mind not being a part of it. So the couple can go do that after and have it be more private and special without the hurt of not having their non member family there. 

This seems pretty harsh in relation to the parents or family that couldn't witness the wedding. I think of Sister Marriott who's parents planted the magnolia tree in their yard so that their daughter could be married there later in life. Then she got married without any family  present.
Parents, LDS or not can be  very invested the marriage of their child and I think this is a wonderful change that will help smooth the path for so many families rather than creating offense through exclusion. I would think that most non-member family aren't interested in the temple sealing and wouldn't mind not being a part of it. So the couple can go do that after and have it be more private and special without the hurt of not having their non member family there. 

And just because you see it as a weakness doesn’t mean it is. After all the Lord has revealed this through his prophet. I see this as a wonderful way of healing hearts and drawing families together. 
I’m also excited that younger siblings would be able to attend the wedding. What a great example the couple  can be to their younger siblings as they make the extra effort to go inside the temple for the sealing. It will separate and add importance I believe to the sealing. 
It feels to me like the perfect puzzle piece has been found for the hole in the puzzle. A satisfying perfect fit!

This seems pretty harsh in relation to the parents or family that couldn't witness the wedding. I think of Sister Marriott who's parents planted the magnolia tree in their yard so that their daughter could be married there later in life. Then she got married without any family  present.
Parents, LDS or not can be  very invested the marriage of their child and I think this is a wonderful change that will help smooth the path for so many families rather than creating offense through exclusion. I would think that most non-member family aren't interested in the temple sealing and wouldn't mind not being a part of it. So the couple can go do that after and have it be more private and special without the hurt of not having their non member family there. 

How? Are you saying that a sealing looses it's reverence, authority, sacredness just because it occured after a civil marriage? That the time inbetween the wedding and the sealing, whether it's hours, days or weeks, causes the bride and groom to loose focus of the sealing ceremony, making it less effective?
I'm going to speculate that if Latter-day Saints in the UK can cherish the temple sealing after getting married then North American members can do the same.
M.

I have thought about it a lot and could never come up with a good reason.  Nobody from my immediate family was able to participate in my marriage.  My mom was the only active member and was unendowed.  There were some serious hard feelings that never need have happened.  I am not the only person who has been in that boat.  This will fix the majority of these issues.

HALLELJUAH!!!!
This is HUGE for people whom are converts or otherwise have close family members that are not 100% active.  I am so happy.

I don't know what was wrong with it. Probably just frozen. DH fixed it. 

I did!!

The child is 18 but I've been told she may be "delayed" mentally. Hard to tell. I only had a brief conversation with her. If so I wonder if CPS should be involved, even though she is 18 in years.
Yes from what I understand the wife is "crazy", whatever that means. I asked the RS president if she was worried about the wife being extremely angry when she gets home and finds out all her stuff has been thrown away. She said, Yes but this was her husbands decision to do this so he'll have to be the one to face the consequences.
The husband has been involved since day one. He has bad habits himself but he was the one who contacted the RS president. He has been taking loads to the dump. The daughter has helped, too. Although her own bedroom needs lots of help, too. 
RS and bishop say they are going to work on getting them the help they need. I don't know what that entails. Again, I have no stewardship and may never find out since I bailed on the cleaning part. 

Well the bishop decided to carry on and try to help them. He's seen the pictures. They say they've made it a matter of fervent prayer so who am I to judge. As I said, I don't have stewardship in this at all. I had no idea who this woman was. Still haven't met her.  I just showed up to help because the RS president is my friend. The husband seems relatively "normal" and wants to help his wife but he's been living in a different part of the house that doesn't look much better.  I feel they need some kind of help beyond what the church can give them. 
I think what's going to happen is that once they get this woman's bedroom in shape for her to return home, she'll need home health nurses to check up on her. Once they are involved, it will hopefully be out of the ward's hands if further referral to the health dept is needed. 
I admire the RS president's grit. I wouldn't have had the guts to step one foot in there that first day when the husband came to her for help. I hope she doesn't get sick from this!! She's mom to a huge brood of kids and grandkids.  

One of the tragedies here is that the "hygiene" habits she's been taught are those responsible for this disaster.   She's got a tough life road ahead of her. 

I did!!