Not Without My DadHow I Missed My Only Daughter’s Weddingby Doug L. Alder The setting was perfect, a picture no artist would ever capture. It was early morning on Lake Powell near the Utah-Arizona border, water as smooth as glass, one red-rock castle after another standing proudly against a beautiful background of blue, reflecting perfectly against the mirror-like surface of the water, a picture so intense, so clear it felt as if we would fall into the sky. My 10-year old daughter Amber stood next to me as I drove, holding tight to the boat’s windshield and smiling as she looked forward, helping her dad watch for anything that may be in our path. Her skin had turned a dark olive after several days of little relief from the sun. Her sun-bleached auburn hair whipped straight back as she bounced and giggled with any little bump we encountered. We looked at one another and smiled, enjoying the perfect father-daughter connection, both wishing this moment could last forever. There are times in our children’s lives that are so memorable, so precious, and so real that they become a part of us. They become a strength we can summon in times of need, times of trouble, hurt or despair. They often act as a life-preserver when we are sinking. At times they are all we have to help get us through this often difficult journey we call life. They are locked in our personal vaults of conscience, more valuable than the most precious of jewels, and contain mystical powers known to heal, to brighten, to cheer, to relieve, to unburden, and even to save. It is ten years later now, as we eagerly anticipate what is to many the ‘crown-jewel’ of cherished family memories, the all-important daughter’s wedding. Amber was so beautiful in her white, modest gown, her hair flowing perfectly to help capture her easy smile and friendly gaze. She had done some professional modeling and was at ease with all the attention the camera was giving her, as she smiled and laughed so naturally, seemingly detached from the cares of the day. She was truly splendid. When the time for the ceremony had come, all the guests gathered inside the large edifice to share in my only daughter’s big day. I was left standing outside the building with my brother Tony, who awkwardly tried lending support, not quite sure how. Although I knew this was the way the day had to go, still I had an unavoidable sense of abandonment as my daughter left to experience perhaps the most important moment of her life without her dad. Over twenty years of parental love, support, encouragement and sacrifice, all culminating in such a glorious moment for those inside, as I waited in the shadows of the tall, uninviting structure. My brother, Tony, stoically chatted and joked, trying to lighten my mood, for we had both been unwelcomed guests that day, excluded from the wedding ceremony held within the confines of the Salt Lake Mormon Temple . I didn’t even know the name of the man performing the marriage. Somewhere deep inside I still secretly thought Amber might still come running out and say “Not without my dad!” Of course, anyone inside the ceremony could have (and would have) told you that I had this coming to me. I had brought this on myself, and had no right to be at my daughter’s wedding. I no longer had a right to enjoy this special day or others like it along with the rest of my family (although I couldn’t help noticing that no one objected to my paying for the wedding). After all, I had done the unthinkable—I had left the Mormon Church. By so doing, according to the teachings of the church (which I was previously well aware of), I had given up my rights as a father to not only enjoy many special moments such as these here on earth with my family, but to even be a part of my family in the next life, a reward promised only to faithful Mormons. My children and their mother would live together in heaven as a family along with God (sans yours truly), and I would be assigned to a ‘lesser kingdom’ to live, not worthy of the family He had entrusted me with. The Mormon Church teaches that the inside of their temples represent the kingdom of God on earth, and strictly enforces the biblical verse stating that ‘no unclean thing may enter therein’. While I take exception to the LDS Church’s (Mormon Church) vision of such an exclusive afterlife, I will first attempt to focus my thoughts on the policies which so directly affect me in this life, specifically with regard to why I wasn’t allowed to view my own daughter’s wedding. In order to better do so, some cursory background information with regard to church policy will be helpful. The current policy essentially demands that no person who is not in good standing with all major tenets of the church may enter the temple at any time, beloved child or family member’s wedding or not. It is an ironclad policy with no exceptions made (not to be confused with the friendly ‘open house’ tours the church conducts for the public at its temples before they are officially placed into service).This policy excludes not only anyone who is not a baptized member of the Mormon Church, but also any member within the church who has not strictly adhered to church commandments which include freely turning 10% of their gross income over to the church (‘tithing’), complete abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, coffee and tea (the ‘word of wisdom’), a strong belief and personal conviction of the truthfulness of the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith (that he was personally and literally visited by God the Father and the Son Jesus Christ, called as a prophet of God’s church, and that the Book of Mormon he translated is the absolute word of God), as well as sustaining and supporting current Mormon church leaders. These are just part of the list of requirements members must meet to be deemed ‘temple worthy’ within the LDS Church. Any member not successfully completing two interviews with church leaders ahead of time, will not be awarded the requisite ‘Temple Recommend’, a small piece of paper signed by both the Mormon Bishopric and Mormon Stake Presidency (who also conduct the interviews), making the holder eligible for admittance not only to the temple in this life, but to enter the highest degree of heaven in the next (supposedly it doesn’t work to just steal someone else’s). It is often carried in a clear plastic protector slightly smaller than a credit card, and is valid for two years at which time the interview process must be repeated. If an infraction of the rules occurs or is observed by either leadership or another member during the two-year period, the ‘recommend’ may be subject to revocation.The relatively new (as far as major religions go) LDS Church is a highly successful enterprise with an organizational structure similar to that of the U.S. corporation. It is led by its prophet and general authorities, a leadership comprised exclusively of men. It is at this level that all church policy is made. This leadership is certainly not lacking in talent, many are former CEO’s, attorneys, high-ranking corporate executives, presidents of universities, as well as others possessing significant administrative, organizational, financial and managerial skills. The church spends millions of dollars each year in public relations and advertising (part of where the 10% goes), promoting itself as a family-centered, family-friendly, and very pro-family church. This is accomplished not only by the 60,000-member bicycle-riding Mormon army (the full-time missionaries) spreading the good news about families worldwide, but also by way of a massive, international public-relations campaign second to absolutely none. ‘Mormon-ads’ are known around the world and have been known to bring tears to the eyes of the most hardened Jew and gentile alike, heartwarming ads which have been the envy of corporate advertisers for years. The worldwide campaign is certainly expensive, yet undoubtedly effective. When Mormon Church members speak of their church, its pro-family values are always near the top of the list.I must state for the record that I still respect and agree with many of the LDS Church’s teachings. There are many things about it I miss. I am happy that my children are members of the church and would not want it any other way at this time in their lives. I believe there is a great work ethic taught within the church, as well as a strong ethic of personal responsibility and accountability which has helped each of my children. What I do not and cannot agree with, however, is a policy of exclusivity regarding who may or may not attend a loved-one’s marriage within Mormon temples, a policy that seemingly flies directly in the face of its very expensive and long sought-after reputation as ‘the family church’. The policy casts (perhaps unintentionally) a very wide net, affecting thousands of Mormons and non-Mormons each year, often resulting in heartache, sadness, resentment, anger, and despair-emotions certainly inconsistent with the mission of any Christian church, particularly of one so publicly desiring to foster family unity. The policy on temple marriage attendance is without doubt a divisive one. By allowing certain but not all members of families to attend, it often creates severe chasms within those families at the very time it should be helping to unite and to strengthen them. The result is often starkly polarizing, creating a sense of entitlement and unity for some, disenfranchisement and bitterness for others. What should be without doubt one of the greatest family moments of a lifetime often becomes a mixed experience at best. In all truthfulness I must admit that even though I love and am very happy for my daughter Amber and her good husband, and of course wish for their greatest happiness unceasingly, I personally could not and cannot view their wedding itself as an especially memorable or happy family event, as I was not there to share in that special moment. I normally just try to not think about it, as for me it continues to be a sad and somewhat troubling memory.In many countries outside the US, where the law requires a public marriage, the LDS Church’s policy is quite different. In these countries, a public or civil wedding takes place first, which of course any family member may attend (including those not ‘temple-worthy’), followed by the ‘sealing’ (the marriage within the Mormon temple), which is the exclusive ceremony limited to those members allowed inside the temple. In the US, however, the church does not allow a civil wedding ceremony before the temple wedding, and strongly discourages its members from holding a civil ceremony after the temple marriage as well, considering it a mockery of the temple wedding. The church’s penalty for any member in the US holding a civil wedding ceremony before the temple wedding is a minimum one-year waiting period before the couple may be married in the Mormon temple.Had I had the opportunity of attending a legal civil wedding for my daughter (either before or after the temple ceremony), I would have found the day infinitely more palatable, as would certainly thousands of others affected by the current policy each year. I believe a policy change by the church as simple as allowing a civil wedding in addition to the temple wedding would help unite and strengthen many thousands of negatively affected families each year. In looking over the decades, a policy change such as this could have affected as many as millions for the better. It is difficult to comprehend how such a change, which could bring about such widespread positive results, may be deemed anything other than worthy of strong consideration. One may wonder whether the LDS Church already realizes the great amount of positive change which could be brought about among those disaffected family members by a seemingly simple change in policy. Does it realize such a change would go far in easing the sting felt by so many of the excluded, reducing the pain of what many consider the undeserved yet sharp ‘slap-in-the-face’ they receive at the hand of the current policy? Of course it does. This then begs the perhaps more important question, ‘if the church’s policy were modified, would the substantial reduction of pain and divisiveness suffered by affected families be considered by its leaders a desirable, family-friendly result?’ If yes, certainly such a modification should be strongly considered and completed swiftly, as many families have and do deal with the pain resulting from this family-divisive policy daily. If not, perhaps an introspective examination of itself and its motives, as well as the relationship of those motives with regard to family unity and general Christianity should be conducted. There have been times in the past when the LDS Church has done just that-changed, and on much weightier issues holding potentially much larger consequences to its image than simply modifying a temple-marriage attendance policy. These changes include (although are not limited to) the church’s stand on plural marriage, as well as its policy regarding black church members not being allowed to hold the priesthood. Both of these high-profile issues were able to be changed when it was deemed necessary, and one would hope these high-profile changes, while certainly at least in part due to political climates at the time, were also done in part because the church felt they would result in the greater good for all members and their families. Modifying the church’s current wedding attendance policy to allow for involvement by all family members could go far in doing what any pro-family church should want to do, which is promote stronger family unity. Is there a ‘downside’ to the Mormon Church in changing the policy? The existing policy undoubtedly is and has been very effective in helping increase church membership numbers, as well as resulting in greater adherence to its rules for temple-entrance. Are these results, however, due to genuine increases in and changes in one’s faith, or simply to family members wanting desperately to not be excluded or feel separated during such an important family event which should include all? One must also ask the question, ‘how sincere can either the conversion or the demonstrated ‘obedience’ of members motivated in such a way be? ‘. Do results of perhaps questionable quality justify the use of questionable means of motivation? Some 26 years ago, shortly before I was married in the Salt Lake City LDS Temple, my future father-in-law (who was a baptized Mormon) gave up smoking and drinking, and even began to pay his 10% tithing to the church. He did this in order to be able to attend his daughter’s wedding. It is highly doubtful more than an hour had passed after he returned home from the wedding than he was enjoying himself by way of a beer in one hand and a cigarette in the other (it’s questionable whether he ever really gave up the habits before the wedding). While having him at the wedding was very nice and did help solidify the family, his preparatory actions were little more than an exercise to satisfy church policy, with little to do with that of the heart. What is unquestionable, however, is that considerable ‘fallout’ is created as a result of this policy, fallout which must be dealt with by thousands of unintended and unwitting participants each year. One’s first inclination may be to simply dismiss this fallout as one of the many inevitable ‘social issues’ often found within a church or religion. Yet in taking a somewhat more critical look, it may be argued that something more fundamental is occurring. Much of the fallout with respect to this may be the result of the church’s use of perhaps fundamentally flawed methods of motivation. Taking something as fundamental and as sacrosanct as one’s instinctive desire for family unity and family preservation, and then using that to obtain certain results, while highly effective, should perhaps be considered more carefully. ‘The Family’ sadly often ends up being used by the church against its families as a motivational tool. One could certainly argue that in all likelihood, any positive results gained from strict enforcement of such a policy are results often shared by the few, with the disproportionately negative results (the fallout), being left to be shared by the many. It is difficult to imagine a more questionable (albeit effective) means to an end than to hold a family hostage from itself. While other churches still use mere eternal damnation as a motivator, the LDS Church scarcely dwells on such archaic techniques (so last millennium!). Modern Mormon doctrine teaches that various levels or ‘degrees of glory’ exist in heaven which nearly all people, Mormon or not, will go to in the next life (except for the very, very worst), all levels which are much greater and much more glorious than this life. Instead of promising a traditional hell, modern LDS Church doctrine takes that which is most important and most precious to so many of us (the concept and preservation of one’s family), effectively turning it into both carrot and stick against the individual families, the very family the church purportedly wishes to strengthen. The result of this is a new (and some would say much more realistic) concept of hell, one spent in a nice place, yet alone, without one’s family. To many, such a bizarre scenario may seem implausible if not impossible. (‘I’d never let anyone pull that kind of %$&@# with my family!). Yet history shows otherwise. Why? Very basic to Mormonism is the belief that each individual has the right to ‘choose’ for one’s self, to make his or her own decision. This is known within the LDS Church as ‘exercising free-agency’. Each may choose for himself total obedience (as Christ did), outright rebellion (as Lucifer did), or something in between. This is where the concept of family is leveraged so successfully. Every Mormon is taught from a very young age (or very early in the missionary discussions), that while all may exercise their own free agency and decide for themselves, should one choose not to believe and to strictly follow the teachings and commandments of the church, he may not be allowed to inherit ‘eternal life’ (which is Mormon-speak for ‘living together as a family in the presence of God for eternity’). The church teaches that eternal life is and should be the main objective of all its members. In probability, many experience little opportunity for true personal ‘choice’ or ‘free agency’ offered by such a plan, one where the stakes are very high, and seemingly set so tremendously in favor of the ‘house’. Adherence to teachings, of which the consequences for violation of such are seemingly so personal and so dire, can become a burden too much for some to bear. More traditional concepts of hell are those which often seem far away and a long time from now. The prospect of losing one’s family, however (particularly within a church in which family-unity is taught as all-important), can seem very real, very daunting, and very ‘now’, resulting in a very powerful yet perhaps very negative means of motivation. During my 45 years as a member of the LDS Church, nothing motivated me more than the nightmarish thought of being separated from my family for eternity. The constant thought of possibly being separated from my loved ones in the next life chilled me to the very bone. I would worry about and question nearly every decision I made as a father or an individual, trying to determine the possible ramifications regarding the status of my eternal family, never feeling my efforts were sufficient. I believe as a result of this, the ‘faith’ I had developed was based upon which for me was negative-motivation, a faith not based as much upon my personal ‘free agency’ or choice as much as upon fear. It was a faith with few roots, not strong enough to survive when truly tested, a faith built upon sand rather than upon rock. I eventually began to feel as if my happy family had been ‘kidnapped’, and in essence, proper behavior had become the ‘ransom’. I felt that my family’s existence and preservation were being used against me, constantly held over my head as some sort of sinister reminder that I’d better behave, ‘or else’. How does one develop real faith in such an environment? While I’m sure many have done so, I found it very difficult and often very frustrating. I often feel that LDS Church policies such as that regarding wedding attendance are intended to give those of us left standing outside the temple a ‘taste of’ that which will eventually be eternal, ‘unless’. While LDS Church policies regarding the family were more than sufficient motivation to encourage proper behavior by me for many years, I eventually began to view some of those very policies (which were so constantly promoted within the church as ‘pro-family’) as ‘family-unfriendly’. It became my opinion that having the concept of my family’s unity and preservation used against me and against my family to obtain desired behavior was fundamentally cruel , and this was what ultimately helped me make the difficult decision to leave the Mormon Church. In ultimately deciding to leave the church, my thought process was not complex. I simply tried to remind myself that the true nature of God is love. I thought of my own children, and couldn’t imagine loving them more as a father than I did. There was nothing they could have done (or not done) that could cause me to separate them from the bonds of our family for eternity, or even exclude them from family events during this lifetime. I simply loved them too much to ever be able to do that. Then I thought of God the Father of all of us, and how much greater and more perfect his love for his children is than mine. I was comforted in the quiet yet powerful reassurance I felt, that if I as a loving father on earth could never break the family bonds of those I love so dearly, why would a loving Father in Heaven, whose love is greatest of all ever do so? While I would like nothing more than to be able to say I am optimistic about the current policy being changed, and being able to attend my next child’s temple marriage (I have three sons, the oldest of which is currently sharing the LDS Church’s message of ‘family’ with those in Argentina), I must admit neither this plea (nor a plethora of others like it in the past) will likely have any effect upon decision-making by the church’s leadership. It is the church’s doctrine and belief that its policies and teachings are the result of (and may be changed by) revelation from God, given directly to the church’s modern-day prophet. In all likelihood, each of my sons will marry, and I will not be allowed to share in it with any of them. It is very likely that my efforts will make little or no difference, and that my plea will simply be filed at church headquarters in Salt Lake City, along with the thousands of other requests for change it receives, without a second thought.Effective or not, as a father I feel I must at least try to do something, or forever be disappointed in myself. I feel I’ve been not just a good father, but a great father (goshdarnit!), as have thousands of other parents who are excluded each year. I have given my all and then some for my kids, and I have the marks to show for it. I cannot and will not allow this to just happen without at least trying to do all I can. If nothing else, perhaps at least my children may better understand what missing this important event means to me as their father, and while the LDS Church may not teach so, I still believe we will be able to enjoy the bonds of family in the next life as in this. I am not motivated by anything in this action other than being a father who feels he, like many others, should have the right to see his children married, and really wants to be there on that special day. Having little means to do much on a large scale, thus far my efforts have been limited to writing this article, and creating a humble yet sincere petition available to anyone who would like to show support. Anyone may sign the petition-mothers and fathers, couples and singles, children and adults, Mormons and Non-Mormons alike. The direct link to the petition is http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/non-mormons-attend-mormon-family-member-wedding. One may also view this petition by going to www.thepetitionsite.com, at which point, under ‘petitions’ one should click on ‘browse’, then ‘find a petition’. At this point a key search phrase should be entered (the subject, such as ‘Mormon Temple Wedding Attendance’) to perform the search. When the petition comes up, one may read it and sign if they wish. Any support is sincerely appreciated. I often think back on that beautiful moment at Lake Powell 10 years ago, for that is a moment which is a most beautiful memory to me, and wish that I had been able to stop time for just a little longer. I also often look forward to and imagine another beautiful moment, a moment when an attitude of inclusiveness and unity reigns over one of exclusiveness and division for thousands of families like mine, a moment that surely will not arrive until more children begin to say ‘Not without my dad’. _____________________________ Mormon Church Family-Related Ad Slogans:‘Family-Isn’t It About Time?’‘Families are Forever’‘Invest in Bonds’‘Safe at Home’‘Eternity is a Long Time’
‘You Can Take It with You’
|
