One year waiting for returnees?

[stemelbow]

40 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

The handbook is not meant to take anything away form inspiration.  What is does do is provide a basis for how we do things in the church, every ward and stake isn't needing to reinvent the wheel every 5 years.  Imagine if every bishop came up with his own temple recommend questions or had a different definition of what it meant to pay a full tithe. 

I'm certainly not saying there's no purpose to having handbook, mind you. 

[HappyJackWagon]

15 minutes ago, rongo said:

You are aware of the updated statement about garments that accompanies the TR questions, right? It's a lot less vague than it used to be. A lot less.

Yes, I am. But the instruction read during the interview does not match the instruction given in the temple. No covenants are made in the temple to wear the garment according to the statement.

So they read the very detailed statement and then ask if we wear the garment night and day, as instructed in the temple, even though the temple does not match the statement or even the "night and day" requirement.

The temple instruction is very vague and there is no covenant associated with it.

[UtahTexan]

I returned after 26 years.  I needed to attend a Church court.  After baptism, I had to wait a year before requesting my blessings restored.  After the request was submitted, it took about 3 weeks for the approval.

[ksfisher]

18 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'm certainly not saying there's no purpose to having handbook, mind you. 

I understand.  People are more than words written on a page in a book, and that's what we're dealing with in the church, people.  But as we deal with our brothers and sisters in the church it's good to have everyone running out of the same playbook.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Yeah, like maybe having every new member sign something and carry that with them 24/7 to help remind them of what they have said they are committed to doing.  And maybe wear something too, that they will see every day to help them remember that they have made certain commitments.

As things are now it is way too easy to be a covenant breaker.  As if people don't even remember what they have said they are committed to doing.

Do you really feel like you needed to unload on me in this way? Thank you, I needed that. 

[rongo]

53 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Yes, I am. But the instruction read during the interview does not match the instruction given in the temple. No covenants are made in the temple to wear the garment according to the statement.

So they read the very detailed statement and then ask if we wear the garment night and day, as instructed in the temple, even though the temple does not match the statement or even the "night and day" requirement.

The temple instruction is very vague and there is no covenant associated with it.

The temple instruction is adequate and fine, but because people push the envelope and make dumb excuses, the Brethren felt the need to put a "Law of Moses" type of detailed explanation into the interview --- to remove dumb excuses and rationalization. It's still ultimately between the member and the Lord, but when they don't wear them to "work out" or "do yardwork," and stay that way all day, running errands --- they can't claim ignorance or innocence. 

Normal people of reasonable intelligence and average good faith understood that even with the less-detailed instruction in the temple. 

Edited August 2, 2016 by rongo

[Ahab]

10 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

Do you really feel like you needed to unload on me in this way? Thank you, I needed that. 

I was agreeing with you, I thought.

Anyway, whether or not you agree with me, I still believe people should understand and remember what they have made a commitment to do.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I was agreeing with you, I thought.

Anyway, whether or not you agree with me, I still believe people should understand and remember what they have made a commitment to do.

Sorry if I took your comments wrong. I was speaking to another posters comments, and expanding on his quote. So if mistaken, I apologize. But I did not suggest such drastic measures, my fear is those who take things casually that have eternal consequences. By the way, Catholics require sponsors and waiting periods and unless mistaken JW's have waiting periods as well. But Evangelicals see both as cults, as well as Mormons, and almost everyone not like them. 

[Glenn101]

4 hours ago, mnn727 said:

4 hours ago, cinepro said:

They should make new converts follow the same requirements as returning members.  Attending for a full year with the intent to be baptized sounds like a good idea for investigators.

 

4 hours ago, mnn727 said:

I've said that for years. It would cut way back on inactives.

I believe that strong home and visiting teaching programs would do that much better. I would like to see statistics about inactivity levels in wards with with and without strong home and visiting teaching programs. I have direct experience with people being reactivated because of conscientious home and visiting teachers.

When a new convert is baptized, they often are leaving behind friends, family, and a social life to greater or lesser extents. If that void is not filled with new friends, loving friends, from their new ward or branch, it is so easy and understandable that they would seek those social needs with old friends and a family that may not have approved. Don't want to derail this thread, so I will just leave it at that.

Glenn

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, Pa Pa said:

Sorry if I took your comments wrong. I was speaking to another posters comments, and expanding on his quote. So if mistaken, I apologize. But I did not suggest such drastic measures, my fear is those who take things casually that have eternal consequences. By the way, Catholics require sponsors and waiting periods and unless mistaken JW's have waiting periods as well. But Evangelicals see both as cults, as well as Mormons, and almost everyone not like them. 

My additions to your thoughts were simply some suggestions on what we could possibly do to help people realize and remember the commitments they have made, rather than just saying yes they should realize and remember them.

Something physical they could look at and actively participate in doing, like actually writing down what they have committed to do and then keeping that written document close to them to help them remember.

Memory aids don't have to be exclusive to very old people.  Even children could benefit from having a note or something stuck on their forehead to help them remember what they have committed to do, with them being the ones to write their own notes.

If not with written words then at least with some kind of symbol.  Like a wedding ring, or a CTR ring, or some symbols on their underwear or pajamas.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Ahab said:

My additions to your thoughts were simply some suggestions on what we could possibly do to help people realize and remember the commitments they have made, rather than just saying yes they should realize and remember them.

Something physical they could look at and actively participate in doing, like actually writing down what they have committed to do and then keeping that written document close to them to help them remember.

Memory aids don't have to be exclusive to very old people.  Even children could benefit from having a note or something stuck on their forehead to help them remember what they have committed to do, with them being the ones to write their own notes.

If not with written words then at least with some kind of symbol.  Like a wedding ring, or a CTR ring, or some symbols on their underwear or pajamas.

Maybe, but investigators are usually required to attend Gospel Essentials for a year, even if already baptized. Hopefully this is happening in every Ward...it not investigators and new members are having a disservice to their Spiritual growth. 

[MorningStar]

10 hours ago, cinepro said:

They should make new converts follow the same requirements as returning members.  Attending for a full year with the intent to be baptized sounds like a good idea for investigators.

I disagree.  When reinstating, that person isn't just baptized again, but receives their temple blessings too if they were endowed.  A new member is only baptized without making more serious covenants.

[rchorse]

8 hours ago, rongo said:

The temple instruction is adequate and fine, but because people push the envelope and make dumb excuses, the Brethren felt the need to put a "Law of Moses" type of detailed explanation into the interview --- to remove dumb excuses and rationalization. It's still ultimately between the member and the Lord, but when they don't wear them to "work out" or "do yardwork," and stay that way all day, running errands --- they can't claim ignorance or innocence. 

Normal people of reasonable intelligence and average good faith understood that even with the less-detailed instruction in the temple. 

Exactly. I think the temple prep instructor in the class I took prior to being endowed had it exactly right. He counseled us to try to find ways to wear our garments whenever possible and not to look for excuses to take them off.

[flameburns623]

18 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

 . . .If you're comfortable discussing it I'd be interested to hear your story about why you left and what led you to want to rejoin. Good luck on achieving your goals!

There are a lot of factors involved. Here are a few:

Departing

Mainly, I had been inactive for most of the time I had been a member, had pursued spirituality in other venues. Spirituality which I could embrace on the fly, within the context of a highly irregular schedule, subject to sudden and frequent changes.

A restructure of wards within my stake had councided with my acceptance of a new job which entailed a floating schedule, mainly on an on-call basis; and considerable weekend work.

Few in my newly-reassigned (and newly-created) ward knew me, nor I them. I believe that I saw home teachers perhaps three, certainly not more than five times in over twenty years.

This, partly due to my work schedule but also because I moved several times coincident with getting married, divorced, married again, and then going from an apartment to a rented home to a permanent home. 

In my sporadic attempts to attend and become active, I was never able to be around enough to integrate back into any of the wards I went to feel at home. At some point, I felt it was better to just move on, formally.

Returning

My life has become (by necessity) more stable over the past three years or thereabouts. I simply cannot continue the life of a flex employee, working completely around the clock every week or two, with upwards of sixty- or seventy-hour work weeks.

So I drew a line in the sand and bid on a position which gices me weekends off. 

At the same time, I grew increasingly dissatisfied with the direction of the Roman Catholic Church. I was casting-about for a church where I would be happier.

Serendipitously, both my Mom and a friend (neither one members of the LDS Church) steered me back towards Mormonism. Here are a few prepared comments (yes, I know testimonies are best extemporaneously delivered, but I am out of practice)  I have put together for Fast & Testimony Sunday:

One month ago, on July 2nd, my mother passed away in C_________.

I wanted to thank the members of the Bishopric as well as the many ward members who extended condolences during this time.

My Mom was not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. And she largely fell away from her religious upbringing for much of her life: although she made peace with God in her last years.

I joined the Army in 1978 and received the Gospel while stationed in Germany. Mom, and my entire family, were surprised to learn that I had joined the Church.Not being especially religious herself, my Mother spoke to me about my decision only rarely.

And, I waxed-and-waned in faithful activity over the decades. After my Army service I came to St. Louis to attend a university here. In college, I attended church not at all.

It was during this time that Mom--who I repeat was never member of this Church--began asking if I was attending the Mormon Church. She would say, repeatedly over the years, "You seemed to be happy there".

After college, craving community,  I became very active in the Loughborough ward in St. Louis. This continued for several years, until work, family challenges,  and various moves made church attendance difficult.  I lapsed into inactivity again.

I have alternated between activity and inactivity for much of thirty years. Some of you have known me from the Godfrey meeting house almost two decades ago.

During all this time, every so often, and out of the blue, Mom would ask me again: "Are you going to the Mormon Church? You always seemed to be happy there".

She last asked me about attending the LDS Church in October of 2014. Mom called me to chat one Sunday morning, and she asked me again, "Were you at the Mormon church?"

Mom had already suffered two mild strokes in 2013 and 2014. Beginning that October she became increasingly prone to falls and moved in with one of my brothers.

In February of this year, she endured a serious health crisis and we were alerted that Mom wasn't going to be with us much longer. I began driving monthly to C_____ to visit Mom.

Something stirred in me then. The Holy Ghost began remonstrating with me. After a few weeks, I contacted then-Bishop _____ and in March I resumed attending services here.

Prayerfully, reflectively, I have been meeting with the Bishop about my testimony. And I have felt the strong confirmation of the Spirit that I belong here.

I know the Church is true, that the Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus  Christ, and that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God.

During one of my last visits with Mom, I told her  that I was going back to the LDS Church. She nodded and said, "Good. You'll be happy there".

She's right.

I am.

I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

 

[ERMD]

20 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

They want to make sure he's not an apostate danger to the rest of the community. Therefore they set arbitrary timelines.

 

 

This is not only incorrect but intentionally misleading and inflammatory.

[Guest]

21 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

I'm not expecting to do my endowments, 

Ever; if so may I ask why? 

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Jeanne said:

It seems odd that you would have to wait that long in regards to your attendance already and support of your Bishop.  Especially when missionaries are baptizing like crazy people who have not really been or had a chance to be active for a year.  Best to you and happiness always.

 

20 hours ago, rongo said:

You are aware of the updated statement about garments that accompanies the TR questions, right? It's a lot less vague than it used to be. A lot less.

 

20 hours ago, Jeanne said:

It seems odd that you would have to wait that long in regards to your attendance already and support of your Bishop.  Especially when missionaries are baptizing like crazy people who have not really been or had a chance to be active for a year.  Best to you and happiness always.

Everyone has to attending Temple Prep classes which last a while to help them prepare. I don't remember how long they last. When my son proposed marriage, they had to attend marriage classes for a long time, to prepare for marriage and and his wife to be so she could prepare for the Temple, as she had never been. He had been because he was a returned missionary. 

[mnn727]

22 hours ago, stemelbow said:

...not to mention it would cut way way back on convert baptisms.  Hey, we're already at an all time low, why not try and get below that? 

I'd rather have actual converts than to baptize a bunch of people to only have them fall away.

[stemelbow]

23 minutes ago, mnn727 said:

I'd rather have actual converts than to baptize a bunch of people to only have them fall away.

Tell that to the big bosses.  I'd rather see us get as many in as possible.  if they leave, they leave.  But I think one problem we have going against us is our exclusiveness and insular ways.  That may be more of the problem of converts leaving quickly as much as anything.  I like to the idea of quick conversion processes and more of an openness and welcome for them to stay. 

[flameburns623]

1 hour ago, Pa Pa said:

Ever; if so may I ask why? 

Not immediately. The post I was responding to was cautioning me I would have to wait a year, and I was affirming that I did not expect to get a full temple recommend so quickly.v

[flameburns623]

21 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

I returned after 26 years.  I needed to attend a Church court.  After baptism, I had to wait a year before requesting my blessings restored.  After the request was submitted, it took about 3 weeks for the approval.

There is a caveat about those who left and committed "serious sins" either before or after having their name expunged. Those folks do have to have approval of the First Presidency. As well as do those who received endowments.

Those who resigned to elude a Church Court might be required to have their old case reviewed by a similar court.

But I am stabbing a guess about that. It may have been a needless extra step in your situation; or, perhaps your Stake President was dotting some "i's" twice.

Or--26 years ago, there may not have been a provision to "resign": to leave, you had to "request excommunication", which would have had to have been reversed by a subsequent ecclesial court. 

Don't want to speculate about your situation more than is fair to your own privacy and discretion. 

Edited August 3, 2016 by flameburns623

[flameburns623]

2 hours ago, ERMD said:

This is not only incorrect but intentionally misleading and inflammatory.

I think it was an attempt at humor. That's how I took it and certainly felt no offense.

[Guest]

33 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

Not immediately. The post I was responding to was cautioning me I would have to wait a year, and I was affirming that I did not expect to get a full temple recommend so quickly.v

Good to hear, and let us know when that happy day comes where you are ready and able to go through them Temple. 

[why me]

3 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

There are a lot of factors involved. Here are a few:

Departing

Mainly, I had been inactive for most of the time I had been a member, had pursued spirituality in other venues. Spirituality which I could embrace on the fly, within the context of a highly irregular schedule, subject to sudden and frequent changes.

A restructure of wards within my stake had councided with my acceptance of a new job which entailed a floating schedule, mainly on an on-call basis; and considerable weekend work.

Few in my newly-reassigned (and newly-created) ward knew me, nor I them. I believe that I saw home teachers perhaps three, certainly not more than five times in over twenty years.

This, partly due to my work schedule but also because I moved several times coincident with getting married, divorced, married again, and then going from an apartment to a rented home to a permanent home. 

In my sporadic attempts to attend and become active, I was never able to be around enough to integrate back into any of the wards I went to feel at home. At some point, I felt it was better to just move on, formally.

Returning

My life has become (by necessity) more stable over the past three years or thereabouts. I simply cannot continue the life of a flex employee, working completely around the clock every week or two, with upwards of sixty- or seventy-hour work weeks.

So I drew a line in the sand and bid on a position which gices me weekends off. 

At the same time, I grew increasingly dissatisfied with the direction of the Roman Catholic Church. I was casting-about for a church where I would be happier.

Serendipitously, both my Mom and a friend (neither one members of the LDS Church) steered me back towards Mormonism. Here are a few prepared comments (yes, I know testimonies are best extemporaneously delivered, but I am out of practice)  I have put together for Fast & Testimony Sunday:

 

 

Welcome back. Sorry about your mom. I think that you used to post on the catholic board and if so, it is wonderful that you are coming back to the lds church because I remember your posts. I wish you peace, contentment and tranquility in the lds church.

[ERMD]

1 hour ago, flameburns623 said:

I think it was an attempt at humor. That's how I took it and certainly felt no offense.

Likely correct, but at the core of most humor is a seed of truth.