When a marriage takes place in an LDS temple, non-Mormon relatives of the couple and Mormon relatives who do not hold a "temple recommend," may not attend the ceremony. Of all the peculiar policies that represent orthodox LDS positions of faith and practice, this one is perhaps the least known about by those outside of the Mormon Church. Yet this practice, breaking up families on the one day they ought to be most united, is the most barbaric. And the worst part is that those who are not members of the LDS Church too often get blindsided by it; they don't understand until it is too late to do anything.
It is a policy whose consequences extend beyond the wedding day. The policy is stated clearly in an official LDS manual as follows:
Who May Attend a Temple Marriage
Only members who have valid recommends and have received their endowment may attend a temple marriage. Couples should invite only family members and close friends to be present for a temple marriage. …Special Meeting for Guests, Who Do Not Have Temple Recommends
A couple may arrange with their bishop to hold a special meeting for relatives and friends who do not have temple recommends. This meeting provides an opportunity for those who cannot enter a temple to feel included in the marriage and to learn something of the eternal nature of the marriage covenant. The meeting may include a prayer and special music, followed by the remarks of a priesthood leader. No ceremony is performed, and no vows are exchanged.No other marriage ceremony should be performed following a temple marriage.
(General Handbook of Instructions, Book 1 Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics, p. 70. Published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1998 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.)
It is interesting to note that the Encyclopedia of
Mormonism in its sections on eternal marriage and temple
ceremonies makes no mention of this exclusionary policy.
In the past, when LDS temples were few and far between,
there was not the emphasis that there is now on temple
marriages as the only acceptable way for truly committed LDS
couples. Parents and other family members and friends who
are not members, cannot attend the wedding. However, this is
not limited to non-members. When I was married, my two
younger siblings, both LDS members in good standing, could
not attend my wedding. Why? Simply put, they were not old
enough to have received their "endowments". This is not
particularly problematic due to the fact that nearly all
active members are aware of and give assent to this policy.
Where problems arise is when a bride or groom’s family is
not LDS. Since I have both witnessed this firsthand and read
or had related to me secondhand accounts I can say that they
go pretty much like this:
- LDS girl meets LDS boy, and they fall in love.
- LDS girl and LDS boy decide they want to get
married.
- In keeping with the religious faith of each, they
decide they want to be married “forever” in an LDS
temple sealing because anything else would be second
best.
- LDS girl and LDS boy announce their decision to
their respective parents.
- LDS boys' parents are delighted. They know that as
members of the LDS Church in good standing, with LDS
Temple recommends, they will be able to attend the
wedding.
- LDS girls' parents are emotionally shell-shocked, having been told that since they are not members of the LDS Church, they will not be allowed to attend the wedding. The parents of the bride-to-be will still be expected to pick up the tab for all the celebrating that will take place afterwards though. They are not happy at all about this arrangement, since they raised their daughter within a devout Protestant faith, fully expecting and looking forward to the day when they would witness her take her wedding vows.
Generally speaking this is where a local LDS leader gets
involved in an effort to “smooth over” feelings. This LDS
leader will explain what he believes regarding LDS temples,
that only in them can couples be united in marriage
eternally, not “until death do us part.” He will explain
that while you may have raised the now LDS girl with
Protestant teachings, she has embraced the LDS religion and
that the highest good is to be married in an LDS temple. The
non-member parents leave the meeting with a sick, sinking
feeling in the pit of their stomachs. They don't know what
to do so they turn to their local pastor. He listens and
observes that he would be delighted to perform the marriage,
and that all that are invited by the bride, the groom
and their parents will be allowed to witness the wedding ...
nobody will be excluded.
This seems sensible enough to the non-LDS parents. They meet
with their daughter and soon to be son-in-law, and propose a
solution to this situation. How about if they get married by
the pastor and then they can go and get “sealed” in an LDS
temple? That way all who are invited may attend, says the
father of the bride. Seems sensible enough to the bride,
after all she has only been a member a little more than a
year.
The groom, on the other hand, gets that same sick, sinking
feeling in the pit of his stomach, thinking back to all
those stories he heard growing up in the LDS Church. What
stories? Oh, you know, the ones where young couples failed
to accept the counsel of LDS Church leaders, especially the
Prophet, to only marry in an LDS temple, since only in an
LDS temple could marriage be made eternal. And what if they
decided to get married in a way that includes the bride’s
parents and then later get sealed in an LDS temple? There is
always the story of the young couple getting married outside
the LDS temple and then before they can go and get sealed in
an LDS temple, they are killed in a terrible car accident.
At this point the father of the bride has probably told the
future son-in-law that he sees this as an issue of obedience
to one of the Ten Commandments, which leaves the future
son-in-law a bit bewildered. All he knows is the
"commandment" to "follow the (LDS) Prophet, he knows the
way". The father of the girl directs the LDS boy to Exodus
20:12, “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may
live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you.” The
father then expresses for the first time his disappointment
that his daughter has rejected her religious upbringing,
adopted another religious faith and one that stands to
divide the brides' family on the single day that they should
be most united. And as if to add “insult to injury” the
bride’s parents will be expected to pick up the tab for all
of the celebrating that will take place after the LDS temple
wedding that they and their other children have been
excluded from attending. This, the father of the bride-to-be
explains to LDS boy, is the very definition of bad manners,
is impolite, and not the best way to start with any
potential in-laws.
The seriousness of the father of the bride-to-be impresses
the LDS boy, so he returns to his LDS bishop to see if there
is a way out of all of this unpleasantness. The LDS bishop
patiently listens and then explains the orthodox LDS
position that if the young man has sufficient faith he will
then trust in the words of the LDS prophets and apostles and
get married and sealed for “time and all eternity” in an LDS
temple. Anything else will be settling for “second best”.
The LDS boy listens and decides that he is persuaded that
his future father-in-law has it right, i.e. all of this
boils down to a matter of whether or not he will “honor” his
father-in-law or not.
It is at this point that the LDS bishop lets the “other
shoe” drop and announces to LDS boy that should he get
married anywhere else, even by a Justice of the Peace, he
and his wife will be required to wait one year before they
can go to an LDS temple and get sealed. Now this perplexes
the LDS boy since he served an LDS mission in Brazil and
distinctly remembered young couples going from a church
chapel where the marriage is performed right next door to
the LDS temple to get “sealed”. The LDS bishop explains that
in many other countries a public place is required by law
for a marriage license to be valid; in those instances the
LDS Church makes accommodations to the circumstances in the
particular host country. In the United States, thank
goodness, the First Amendment protects everyone from this
blatant form of discrimination. While it is not stated, it
is clearly implied that the one year wait is a means to
coerce the young couple into only having a temple marriage,
and if not successful, punishes them for not complying. What
is this young man to do?
I explained just the sort of situation above to my wife who
is a committed LDS and ended by saying that this practice is
barbaric. She gave no argument, and only said that I had
given her something to think about. I hope so; our daughters
are now 8 and 12 and with the passage of each day I come a
little closer to that fateful day. What will I do? Well, I
think you know by the narrative I have written what I will
do ... or at least I think I do. Will I have the courage of
my convictions to take a stand? I think I do ... then again
that is still a few years out.