Husband takes wife's name/Russia

Is there currently support in LCR for a husband taking a wife's name? Also, what is the policy for being sealed in Russia (Helsinki)? Is a civil marriage required first?

Thanks.

albanymike wrote:Is there currently support in LCR for a husband taking a wife's name?

I'm not sure what you mean by "support". The church system allows the clerk to change the legal name as well as the household name. So, regardless of what it may default to, it can be fixed.

albanymike wrote:Also, what is the policy for being sealed in Russia (Helsinki)? Is a civil marriage required first?

I think the guidance on that would be found in Handbook 1: 3.6.1. (However, you'd have to be a clerk or in the bishopric to see it.) It really depends on if the country recognizes a temple marriage. I don't think we have a lot of members from that area in this forum.

Interestingly, I no longer see a suggestion of having a civil marriage if the trip to the temple is going to be a long one.

russellhltn wrote:

albanymike wrote:Also, what is the policy for being sealed in Russia (Helsinki)? Is a civil marriage required first?

I think the guidance on that would be found in Handbook 1: 3.6.1. (However, you'd have to be a clerk or in the bishopric to see it.) It really depends on if the country recognizes a temple marriage. I don't think we have a lot of members from that area in this forum.

Interestingly, I no longer see a suggestion of having a civil marriage if the trip to the temple is going to be a long one.

Well, the situation is that the bride is Russian, and the groom is American, but is taking her surname and will be moving to Russia with her, where they will reside permanently. What it comes down to is where the greater wisdom lies: do they get sealed here in the States? If so, will Russia recognize a temple marriage? If no, then they would get married in Russia, where research indicates they'd have to be married at a civil registry office. If that were the case, then would they be able to be sealed on the same day, or would the one-year period trigger?

I've been trying to research all this and it's one of those more questions than answers thing. Thanks!

albanymike wrote:What it comes down to is where the greater wisdom lies: do they get sealed here in the States?

It used to be that a couple that were traveling long distance together should get married before traveling. I'm not seeing that guidance now, but it still seems like a good idea.

albanymike wrote:If so, will Russia recognize a temple marriage?

A quick web search suggests that some paperwork needs to find filed, but a US marriage can be recognized in Russia. I'd suggest contacting the Russian Embassy on the process.

albanymike wrote:If no, then they would get married in Russia, where research indicates they'd have to be married at a civil registry office. If that were the case, then would they be able to be sealed on the same day, or would the one-year period trigger?

If Russia doesn't recognize a temple marriage, then the one year waiting period doesn't apply. However, a temple marriage performed in the US would be the same as a US legal marriage, so it shouldn't be that much of a problem. Since the alternative location is in Finland, there's no guarantee that will be any easier.

You may find it simpler for them to get married in the US and file the paperwork. Note that to get a temple recommend, the membership record has to be in the ward that's issuing the recommend. If record hasn't been in the ward for one year, then the bishop must check with the prior bishop(s) before issuing the recommend. (Handbook 1: 3.3.3) Obviously, that's could be a bit tricky in the case of a move between US and Russia, given the differences in time and language. It's unclear to me what the requirements are for issuing a living ordinance recommend.

albanymike wrote:Well, the situation is that the bride is Russian, and the groom is American, but is taking her surname and will be moving to Russia with her, where they will reside permanently. What it comes down to is where the greater wisdom lies: do they get sealed here in the States? If so, will Russia recognize a temple marriage? If no, then they would get married in Russia, where research indicates they'd have to be married at a civil registry office. If that were the case, then would they be able to be sealed on the same day, or would the one-year period trigger?

There are two things to consider, the civil marriage and the sealing in the temple. In the United States, a civil marriage may be performed legally in the temple, so the marriage and sealing may take place at the same time. In many other countries, civil marriage ceremonies must take place in a public place and then the sealing follows in a temple.

So the real question is will Russia recognize a civil marriage from the United States. If so, they can be married and sealed in the U.S. and then move to Russia as a married couple. Even though they were married and sealed in the temple, they will have a civil marriage certificate from the state where the temple was located and would use that if Russia will accept it.

If they must be married in Russia, which does not currently have a temple, and they are otherwise qualified, the one-year waiting period does not apply under one of the exceptions in Handbook 1. They would be sealed in a temple as soon as practical afterward.

That is what the Handbook says and that is my experience, but PLEASE talk to the temple. They are well-acquainted with these situations and will be able to tell you for certain if the couple will qualify for the exception. The temple knows how to properly read and interpret the Handbook. Ask the question before going to the temple. If they arrive and the temple says the couple does not qualify for the exception, they will have to wait a year after their civil marriage.

Now according to your post, you have another problem. Helsinki is not in Russia. It is in Finland. So you have the scenario where they may qualify under Finnish law to be married and sealed in the Helsinki Temple, but would need to confirm beforehand that Russia will recognize a civil marriage from Finland. However, if they are legally married in Russia, the couple may be sealed in Finland, or any other temple, afterward. Just make sure to verify this with the temple.

russellhltn wrote:It used to be that a couple that were traveling long distance together should get married before traveling. I'm not seeing that guidance now, but it still seems like a good idea.

That exception has been removed from the Handbook and no longer applies.

lajackson wrote:

russellhltn wrote:It used to be that a couple that were traveling long distance together should get married before traveling. I'm not seeing that guidance now, but it still seems like a good idea.

That exception has been removed from the Handbook and no longer applies.

I should clarify. If the choice is between getting married sooner and traveling, or long distance traveling unmarried, it seems like the former is wiser. However, the rules outlined in the Handbook still apply.

I'm not sure why the exception was removed. Perhaps because so much travel isn't that "long" anymore, or perhaps the exception was being stretched beyond it's intent.

russellhltn wrote:I'm not sure why the exception was removed. Perhaps because so much travel isn't that "long" anymore, . . .

I seem to recall that was the reason given in the letter announcing the change, but it was a long time ago and I may be mistaken. It seems there was mention of temples being more readily available now.