Would you lie during a temple recommend interview in

[MikeWaters]

When my parents were married, only one relative was in attendance at the wedding. My father's grandmother.

[marsupial]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

When my parents were married, only one relative was in attendance at the wedding. My father's grandmother.

That was pretty much the same for when my parents were sealed. I think my mother's grandma was there. That was it.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

When my parents were married, only one relative was in attendance at the wedding. My father's grandmother.

When we married, no immediate relatives were in attendance. One distant relative from my wife's side attended. My parents were not able to, and neither were the in-laws. So I'm familiar with the "not-lying" syndrome.

It's a bit lonely when nobody's there. I've not experienced anything else.

[BYU71]

It is all about expectations. For instance: I had a a non-member confide in me he was pretty pissed off that the church would not allow him to see his daughter married.

I told him, it isn't the church that is stopping you, it is your daughter. She has chosen to exclude you from the cerimony. Your expectation is that your daughter is going to do things that satisfy you. She is getting married now. If you not being able to see the ceremony is the biggest thing she chooses over you in the future now she is married, you will be lucky.

I then asked him if he believed in the LDS teachings. He said no. I said then what is it you have really missed out on. I would be a lot more worried if she wouldn't let you have an open bar at the reception.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Archaea

When we married, no immediate relatives were in attendance. One distant relative from my wife's side attended. My parents were not able to, and neither were the in-laws. So I'm familiar with the "not-lying" syndrome.

It's a bit lonely when nobody's there. I've not experienced anything else.

I wish I could say that is what happened at mine. My MIL went to her Bishop and got a recommend. I won't say she lied to get one, but I wouldn't have given her one.

All through the session she kept telling my ex, well now he thinks he really has you locked up because you have done this in the Temple.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BYU71

It is all about expectations. For instance: I had a a non-member confide in me he was pretty pissed off that the church would not allow him to see his daughter married.

I told him, it isn't the church that is stopping you, it is your daughter. She has chosen to exclude you from the cerimony. Your expectation is that your daughter is going to do things that satisfy you. She is getting married now. If you not being able to see the ceremony is the biggest thing she chooses over you in the future now she is married, you will be lucky.

I then asked him if he believed in the LDS teachings. He said no. I said then what is it you have really missed out on. I would be a lot more worried if she wouldn't let you have an open bar at the reception.

See?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Adam

Because it would be categorically horrible in what way if an un-endowed person saw a sealing?

myboynoah's sister chose not to lie and didn't attend. If she had lied and attended, would the ceremony have been any less efficacious? If not, how would her have attending telling the truth have diminished the sealing?

I just don't get your thinking here. I don't see how allowing the unwashed and unworthy to witness a holy rite is "treating it lightly" at all.

Speaking of treating lightly

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showpos...2&postcount=13

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Adam

Because it would be categorically horrible in what way if an un-endowed person saw a sealing?

myboynoah's sister chose not to lie and didn't attend. If she had lied and attended, would the ceremony have been any less efficacious? If not, how would her have attending telling the truth have diminished the sealing?

I just don't get your thinking here. I don't see how allowing the unwashed and unworthy to witness a holy rite is "treating it lightly" at all.

Because they haven't made/kept the required covenants.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BYU71

I wish I could say that is what happened at mine. My MIL went to her Bishop and got a recommend. I won't say she lied to get one, but I wouldn't have given her one.

All through the session she kept telling my ex, well now he thinks he really has you locked up because you have done this in the Temple.

In fact, we had one of the smaller rooms at the LA temple, and there were two of my wife's ward members there. Now that I think about it, it was amazingly quaint but a bit out of the ordinary. In fact, perhaps I'm wrong, but temple workers almost outnumbered wedding party.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Adam

I don't get this line of reasoning.

It is OK for those that haven't made the covenants of baptism, confirmation, priesthood ordination, sacrament of the Lord's Supper to watch others do so.

The endowment is in a catagory in and of itself as it is too unwieldy to observe and contains secrets not to be shared with the unendowed.

But the sealing is more like a baptism/confirmation to me then it is like the endowment.

Are you saying the grip and the robes themselves constitute secrets not to be seen by the unendowed as well as the things specifically named as secret in the endowment? I guess I assume if it was also to be kept so secret they would say so like they do for other things. And if it isn't secret they you have an ordinance more like baptism/confirmation then like the endowment.

I'm not going to get into a lot of detail discussion with someone like you.

A person ought to be endowed to witness the sealing ceremony. It is not similar to baptism in that regard, although you'll note unworthy/non-members are not permitted to view baptisms for the dead, which in form are nearly identical to live baptisms.