I think the thing that bothers me the most in the LDS religion is how in England it is legally required for
couples to be married civilly before going to the temple to be sealed. Marriages have to be performed in public. And after they're married, they
can go be sealed literally right after their civil ceremony.
How many families have hated the church and their new child-in-law because they couldn’t see their child married because they chose to be married in the temple. Because that’s what we’re told to do, at least here in California. And I used to just accept that as being a reasonable sacrifice to make if you really desired a temple marriage that badly. But then finding out that the complete opposite is required by law in another country just makes me angry.
There’s such a huge stigma here (in Southern California) about not getting married in the temple. Basically, if you aren’t then everyone sits around and thinks about what you could have done to disqualify yourself.
Why are marriage and taking out your endowments considered to be one and the same? Marriage is marriage. You are married because you love your partner, to make yourself a better person, to form a union, to have a family, and any other reasons people choose to get married. You attend the temple when you are spiritually prepared. Why it has become the "norm" that just because you are ready for marriage means that you are spiritually prepared to take on the covenants made in the temple, is beyond me, and something that bothers me deeply.
Take the "been-through-the-temple return-missionaries" I know who put a hollowed out dildo on the parking brake of their friends getaway car at their wedding reception. Yeah, real examples of spiritual maturity there.
I found this beautiful blog, in which most of what I feel about the subject, and everything my Mother has expressed about the heartache she has felt in being married and sealed in the temple twice, and yet has led to two failed marriages, perfectly illustrates.
First, the premise is talking about how the idea of the "temple marriage being the only marriage" came about. And it makes perfect sense. In the "sexual revolution" of the 60's and 70's, the church needed to find a way to counsel it's youth about how to combat the new temptations of the day. This eventually created the idea of "Keep yourself pure so that you will be worthy to take a young woman/ accompany a young man to the temple."
Here's the quote:
How many families have hated the church and their new child-in-law because they couldn’t see their child married because they chose to be married in the temple. Because that’s what we’re told to do, at least here in California. And I used to just accept that as being a reasonable sacrifice to make if you really desired a temple marriage that badly. But then finding out that the complete opposite is required by law in another country just makes me angry.
There’s such a huge stigma here (in Southern California) about not getting married in the temple. Basically, if you aren’t then everyone sits around and thinks about what you could have done to disqualify yourself.
Why are marriage and taking out your endowments considered to be one and the same? Marriage is marriage. You are married because you love your partner, to make yourself a better person, to form a union, to have a family, and any other reasons people choose to get married. You attend the temple when you are spiritually prepared. Why it has become the "norm" that just because you are ready for marriage means that you are spiritually prepared to take on the covenants made in the temple, is beyond me, and something that bothers me deeply.
Take the "been-through-the-temple return-missionaries" I know who put a hollowed out dildo on the parking brake of their friends getaway car at their wedding reception. Yeah, real examples of spiritual maturity there.
I found this beautiful blog, in which most of what I feel about the subject, and everything my Mother has expressed about the heartache she has felt in being married and sealed in the temple twice, and yet has led to two failed marriages, perfectly illustrates.
First, the premise is talking about how the idea of the "temple marriage being the only marriage" came about. And it makes perfect sense. In the "sexual revolution" of the 60's and 70's, the church needed to find a way to counsel it's youth about how to combat the new temptations of the day. This eventually created the idea of "Keep yourself pure so that you will be worthy to take a young woman/ accompany a young man to the temple."
Here's the quote:
"This completely laudable goal of raising
chaste and conscientious young men and women has, over the years,
resulted in at least two unforeseen and unintended consequences.
- Those members of the church who were married in the temple could hardly help passing silent judgment on those who, for whatever reason, were not. Those who chose a church or civil marriage came to be seen as something akin to second-class members, persons who were somehow weak, or lacking in the faith.
- The false idea was inadvertently nurtured in the imagination of many a young Mormon girl from a very early age, that if she kept herself worthy, one day an equally worthy returned missionary (the ultimate in handsome manliness) would sweep her up like prince charming and carry her to the temple which was, in her imagination, a magic fairy castle where she would be dressed as a princess and celebrated by all within on the glorious day of her wedding. And then, as a reward for a lifetime of continence, she would live the rest of her life happily ever after with all her dreams fulfilled."
1. How is that a Christ-like attitude? It's not. And yet most every single LDS member at least in my experience has some kind of judgement issues regarding one subject or another.
2. I've listened to my Mother tell me how horrible she feels, and ask herself over and over what she did wrong, because her marriages failed. I know my Mom, and the answer is nothing. She stuck things out and tried her hardest for years and years after she knew that the relationship was doomed. But because of this attitude, that living a good life means that you are automatically rewarded with your perfect Priesthood holding Prince Charming who is guaranteed to be the pinnacle of everything a good LDS man should be, people like my Mom get really hurt. And understandably so.
The point? Going to the temple to be married does not make you better than a couple who was married civilly and sealed later. This idea has only been around for 50 years or so, and even so only in certain parts of the world (refer back to what this post began with).
I couldn't be more excited for my civil wedding, which is now in 50 days! And when Max and I make it to the temple, it will be because we are prepared, not because we're afraid of being judged.
2. I've listened to my Mother tell me how horrible she feels, and ask herself over and over what she did wrong, because her marriages failed. I know my Mom, and the answer is nothing. She stuck things out and tried her hardest for years and years after she knew that the relationship was doomed. But because of this attitude, that living a good life means that you are automatically rewarded with your perfect Priesthood holding Prince Charming who is guaranteed to be the pinnacle of everything a good LDS man should be, people like my Mom get really hurt. And understandably so.
The point? Going to the temple to be married does not make you better than a couple who was married civilly and sealed later. This idea has only been around for 50 years or so, and even so only in certain parts of the world (refer back to what this post began with).
I couldn't be more excited for my civil wedding, which is now in 50 days! And when Max and I make it to the temple, it will be because we are prepared, not because we're afraid of being judged.
No comments:
Post a Comment