Thankyou so much, for letting the naive know more about our sacred weddings. There is nothing weird about being in love, and getting married by your beliefs. You know so much about our ceremonies, and people like yourselves are the ones who can talk. NOT some Mr. Know It All. Thankyou again, I am mormon, and any wedding ceremony is sacred and beautiful, not just ours. To the naive, show some respect dude!
Welcome to the SDMB, and thank you for posting your comment.
Please include a link to the article if it’s on the straight dope web site. To include a link, it can be as simple as including the web page location in your post (make sure there is a space before and after the text of the URL).
The relevant Staff Report can be found here:
What’s the story on secret Mormon weddings? (17-Dec-1999)
Since this is a staff report, not a Straight Dope column, the thread will be moved to the «Comments on Staff Reports» forum.
moderator, «Comments on Cecil’s Columns»
Um, Tamara, no disrespect intended, but what’s your beef, exactly? The report was pretty straightforward, made it clear that a lot was unknown and what was known had to be viewed fairly uncritically because it might be both inaccurate AND might have originally come from hostile reporters.
Sure, Chip and Ian used the term “weird”, but not so much to denigrate but to actually cut Mormons a break. I read it as, if it seems weird to you, well lots of rituals seems weird to outsiders. In other words, we’re all a little strange.
Frankly, I found the report, while with a tone of whimsy, all in all quite respectful. I know some people who view Mormons negatively, but I’ve never really understood why. It’s not because you’re thin-skinned, is it?
Eh, I dunno, Bungie, if you read the OP with your Sarcasm Detector set on “OFF”, it just sounds like she’s saying “thank you for the article”.
I thought the article was informative and respectful, too.
I see what you mean now, Duck, but I have to admit, it was hard not to read it as sarcastic and offended.
But if I misunderstood, Tamara, I apologize.
On reading the staff report, I noticed the following text which the powers-that-be might want to fix up. In specific, I recommend removing the words that I’ve boldfaced.
I would never use the term “weird” all by itself about the LDS, being LDS myself although I’ve not made it to the Temple yet (still hoping to clean up my act enough).
I personally thought the article was pretty clear that Ian considered them as goofy as he considers the ceremonies of other faiths–that’s hardly a condemnable issue.
Heck, I consider the whole “till death do us part” bit in marriages of other faiths (and for LDS “time only” marriages) to be goofy, although many non-Mormon women I know think those words are the most beautiful in the English language. To me, and most Mormons I know, a beautiful marriage ceremony is one in which the celebrants believe they’ll be together for eternity, even after this “frail existence” as one LDS song has it.
A very good site (which I would have suggested be included in the article had I known about the site at the time) is http://www.ldsweddings.com. This not only provides information to the celebrants themselves but has some good suggestions on how to take care of guests who, for whatever reason, are not eligible to enter the Temple.
As it is, the article, IMHO, did not come close to defiling the sacredness of either the Temple or the wedding itself.
P.S. The ceremony is not secret, it’s sacred. There’s a way open to anyone to see exactly what happens: get baptized, etc. 
Monty, I would more say that it is secret because it’s sacred.
Something can be sacred without being secret. An example would be communion, or the Lord’s supper (Catholic and protestant versions). Or a baptism. Those are important sacred events in those churches, but there is nothing secret about them. Anyone, even the uninitiated and those who aren’t interested in partaking themselves, can find out every detail about it.
Whereas the LDS marriage is only for the “in crowd”. That by definition is a secret.
I’m not making any judgment about rightness or wrongness of protecting ceremonies by secrets. I’m merely explaining.
Monty, can you explain (if you’re able to) the references in both your post and the article about some Mormons not being able to enter the Temple? Why are some Mormons able to do so, and others are not?
The reasons some of us cannot enter the temple, are because there is a certain point when we are finally prepared to understand & accept our faith more. That is the reason why some members fall away from the church, because they are not ready to accept things. When you enter the temple, you must be worthy… (Morally clean, following our beliefs, paying our tithe, etc…) I am still a little naive about some things, so I can’t help much with your curiosity. Sorry! But I can tell you, that it is too sacred to mention certain events that take place in the temples. So, it may be a little hard to find out anything from anyone. Hope you learn more!
I’m a little surprised that no one has brought this up, but what you’re all talking about isn’t, strictly speaking, a Mormon wedding, but a Sealing ceremony. You CAN attend a Mormon wedding without going to a Temple. I say this because I’ve been Best Man at a Mormon wedding, and I’m not even Mormon.
The wedding was far away from a Temple, so there wasn’t a possibility of the couple being Sealed.(This was in New York state. Surprisingly, the Mormons don’t have a Temple anywhere near the Joseph Smith house site near Palmyra) They were married in the Bishop’s house, and non-Mormons could attend. The plan was for them to be Sealed in a separate ceremony later, when they could get to a Temple. Of course, the non-Mormons couldn’t attend that (unless they were willing to convert, and to be certified as Mormons in Good Standing).
In fact, an LDS Temple was opened in Palmyra, New York in 2000.
I was also Best Man in an LDS wedding, though this was a Sealing in the Salt Lake City Temple. As someone who was not LDS, I was unable to attend the ceremony. As it was explained to me, there is no real role for a Best Man at a Temple Sealing. From the couple’s friends and family members who attended, the Bride and Groom found the ceremony quite moving.
For the non-LDS guests, the couple arranged a very nice tour of Temple Square given by some of the missionaries on duty there. As part of the tour, they showed us pictures of Temple sealing rooms and described the ceremony a bit.
After the ceremony was completed, we met the couple in a small chapel adjacent to the Temple, and went to have pictures taken on the Temple steps.
Evidently Cal & Bil didn’t read the Staff Report.
Monty,
I’m confused by your comment. Of course I read the Staff Report. What do you think I missed?
The one thing I can think of is that my being Best Man is somehow contradictory with not being allowed into the Temple Sealing (referred to in the Staff Report as a marriage for “time and eternity”). Although I was not at the ceremony, I performed all of the other traditional duties of the Best Man, including the toast at the reception, referreeing between the bride and the caterer, and running to the jewlers at the last minute to pick up the rings when the groom forgot to make time to do it.
I think you missed:
Next question, please.