Outside Looking In or Inside Looking Out?

[_harmony]

What sort of changes would have to occur within the hierarchy itself to allow this sort of change to happen at the root level?

Several of the current Brethren would need to be welcomed to their next state of being.

[_Cicero]

What sort of changes would have to occur within the hierarchy itself to allow this sort of change to happen at the root level?

First of all, someone high up within the hierarchy will have to come out and say in general conference that the greatest commandment is actually not obedience to priesthood leaders but actually to love God above all else and to love your neighbor as yourself.

When I hear that, then I'll know something has really changed.

[_harmony]

E

What sort of changes would have to occur within the hierarchy itself to allow this sort of change to happen at the root level?

First of all, someone high up within the hierarchy will have to come out and say in general conference that the greatest commandment is actually not obedience to priesthood leaders but actually to love God above all else and to love your neighbor as yourself.

When I hear that, then I'll know something has really changed.

When pigs fly and hell freezes over, and not one second before.

[_sansfoy]

I'm back from Utah and it was difficult to fly across the country and not see the wedding. It seemed so unnecessary to exclude me, non-Mormon family and friends, and younger siblings, cousins, etc., who hadn't been endowed. Is it necessary theologically to exclude people from witnessing temple sealings unless they are themselves deemed worth to be active participants in temple rituals? I can't quite wrap my mind around this except to see it as a way to control the faithful and guilt the unworthy.

[_zeezrom]

Is it necessary theologically to exclude people from witnessing temple sealings unless they are themselves deemed worth to be active participants in temple rituals? I can't quite wrap my mind around this except to see it as a way to control the faithful and guilt the unworthy.

The faithful certainly don't look at it that way.

[_Nortinski]

Let's hope Mitt Romney wins the election for the sake of NOMs out there.

The rest of the country will be screwed but thank God the NOM's will be happy.

[_harmony]

Is it necessary theologically to exclude people from witnessing temple sealings unless they are themselves deemed worth to be active participants in temple rituals?

Some things would have to change in the sealing were that the case, specifically the positioning of the hands across the altar during the sealing. Also the clothing worn by the bride and groom. The authorities are not willing to budge on that, so I don't see any changes coming down in the next decade.

I think it's more likely they would change the year-wait after a civil ceremony than they would change the sealing itself. And I don't see much movement in that direction either.

[_Yoda]

Is it necessary theologically to exclude people from witnessing temple sealings unless they are themselves deemed worth to be active participants in temple rituals?

Some things would have to change in the sealing were that the case, specifically the positioning of the hands across the altar during the sealing. Also the clothing worn by the bride and groom. The authorities are not willing to budge on that, so I don't see any changes coming down in the next decade.

I think it's more likely they would change the year-wait after a civil ceremony than they would change the sealing itself. And I don't see much movement in that direction either.

You know...I honestly don't see why more ceremonies like the one we did with my daughter can't be encouraged. She and her husband were sealed in the temple in the morning. It was really meaningful because her gradnfather is the temple president, and was able to seal them. We kept that sealing very small...just immediate family. Then, since my son-in-law's parents are not members, we had a traditional wedding ceremony, complete with bridesmaids, groomsmen, flower girl and ring bearer that afternoon at a club house we had rented out. Our bishop was a jewel. He conducted the ceremony, and allowed my daughter and husband to exchange vows that they had written for each other. My daughter had both her Dad and I walk her down the aisle. Both ceremonies were equally moving. I cried at both.

My daughter and new son-in-law didn't feel that the second ceremony diminished the first in any way. They were both different and held meaning. It also meant the world to my daughter's new in laws that they were included in the process. It went a long way in establishing good relationships between all of us. I know that some bishops discourage this type of thing, but I really don't understand why. I think that if the Church outwardly encouraged this type of ceremony for situations like part member families, it would go a long way in promoting inclusion.

[_Fence Sitter]

Great post Sansfoy.

My experience as a life longer "member" has been outstanding and one that I cherish. In real life my member friends and family have been nothing but supportive and loving and have been tolerant of my skepticism. I have constantly been treated with respect and love. I know my experience is perhaps unusual for those on the fringe. The worst encounters I have had with LDS people have been on message boards like this.

I think there are two factors that will/are accelerating openness within the Church. The expanding emphasis within the Church to be accepted within the Christian community as "just like everyone else" and information/communication technology.

[_zeezrom]

The rest of the country will be screwed but thank God the NOM's will be happy. :surprised:

I think I will thank God. NOM's have been through enough.