Sunday, February 6, 2011

Sealings in less than a year!

As is widely known, the church requires members who were married civilly without being sealed in a temple at the same time* to wait one year from the date of the civil marriage before they can be sealed.

It’s not as widely known that there are a few exceptions to this, the most interesting (in my opinion) being that if one or both of the members had been a member of the church for less than a year at the time of the civil marriage, they’re eligible to be sealed as soon as both of them have been confirmed members for at least a year.

For example: If someone got baptized this past 1 January, and another this past 1 February, if they got married this coming 1 June, they wouldn’t have to wait until the following 1 June to be sealed, but rather only until the next 1 February. Also, as i read things, even if a lifelong member married the person baptized this past 1 February on 1 June, they’d only have to wait until the next 1 February for their sealing, not the following 1 June.

So if you’re going to require waiting periods to enter the temples, i like this policy for a number of reasons. (And, contrary to what one might expect from reading this blog, i actually do like finding church policies that i like.)

* For those countries that don’t recognize a temple sealing as a valid marriage, substitute “as close together as possible” for “at the same time”.


Heather the Mama Duk said...

I know someone (lifer) who married a convert. Convert joined two months before they were married (civilly). They were sealed 10 months later just after Convert was a member one year. That was a few years ago. A few people tried to convince them they were breaking rules, but they were not.

David B said...

Of course, if their temple (and bishop, and stake president) actually had been allowing them to “break the rules” they wouldn’t have actually been breaking any rules, would they?