Rumors of Changes to Temple Worship

[Jerry Ray]

9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

thanks. That makes me feel a little better

Great... now I feel better

[rockpond]

8 minutes ago, Duncan said:

do you have a reference where he said that? The only one he said that maybe kind of true is the 1 hour Temple session, assuming these new changes in the session are on hour- Other than that he's flat out wrong-i.e. "No more garments required except in the temple. Bill says this almost happened before. Church is hemorrhaging millennials, who don’t wear their g’s much anyway. They need to retain more of them. Scary (for TSCC) low retention numbers for the youth. Problem is if it’s optional, those who “choose” to keep wearing them gain a “more faithful than thou” status in Mormon culture." The Church is losing young  members because they don't or won't wear garments?????  he also got wrong "no more 1 year waiting period to go through the temple after joining church. Another burden for some (though relatively few)." 

edit to add-I have a friend in Provo right who heard in some areas of the world the Church is considering short endowment sessions in stake centres, who knows, sounds kind of out there TBH

Here's my 10/2/18 post that started the Bill Reel's Conference Predictions Thread:

Bill Reel released a new episode of his Mormon Discussions Podcast yesterday (10/1/18) that gives six predictions for general conference. 

1. Lowering the age for sisters to serve missions (to 18) and allowing them for serve for 24 months. 

2. The two-hour block. 

3.  Removing the one year waiting period between a civil marriage and a temple sealing. 

4.  Changing the “requirement” of wearing garments to only when you are doing temple work. 

5.  Creation of a short endowment ceremony, under an hour, that cuts out the video segments. 

6.  Long term (5 year) closure of the Salt Lake Temple for major renovations.  Reel specifically put forward this one as a test of his source.  He said that the source that gave him the above items said that the SL Temple closure was discussed in the same meetings as the other items above. 

He isn’t necessarily saying that all six items will happen in this conference, just that they are all being discussed among the Brethren.  

#2 happened but everyone was already expecting that.

I'm already forgetting but didn't they announce upcoming renovations for pioneer era temples?  This would give some validity to #6 (that wasn't something I'd seen rumored anywhere else).

Now, it turns out that #5 is somewhat close to being true... it may not be under an hour but reports are that the video segments have been cut out, replaced by stills with an audio narration.

That's 3 of 6.  And he didn't say that they'd all happen at that conference, just that they were being discussed by the Brethren.

[Duncan]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Here's my 10/2/18 post that started the Bill Reel's Conference Predictions Thread:

Bill Reel released a new episode of his Mormon Discussions Podcast yesterday (10/1/18) that gives six predictions for general conference. 

1. Lowering the age for sisters to serve missions (to 18) and allowing them for serve for 24 months. 

2. The two-hour block. 

3.  Removing the one year waiting period between a civil marriage and a temple sealing. 

4.  Changing the “requirement” of wearing garments to only when you are doing temple work. 

5.  Creation of a short endowment ceremony, under an hour, that cuts out the video segments. 

6.  Long term (5 year) closure of the Salt Lake Temple for major renovations.  Reel specifically put forward this one as a test of his source.  He said that the source that gave him the above items said that the SL Temple closure was discussed in the same meetings as the other items above. 

He isn’t necessarily saying that all six items will happen in this conference, just that they are all being discussed among the Brethren.  

#2 happened but everyone was already expecting that.

I'm already forgetting but didn't they announce upcoming renovations for pioneer era temples?  This would give some validity to #6 (that wasn't something I'd seen rumored anywhere else).

Now, it turns out that #5 is somewhat close to being true... it may not be under an hour but reports are that the video segments have been cut out, replaced by stills with an audio narration.

That's 3 of 6.  And he didn't say that they'd all happen at that conference, just that they were being discussed by the Brethren.

But the two hour Church rumour has been around for decades as you say, my brother heard it in the early 90's, my Mom heard it before that even, and I wasn't talking about those but this endowment change. I won't fault the guy if it's 50 minutes or 70 minutes but specifics is what I was after, and so far garments aren't even mentioned with the changes and people leaving because they don't/won't wear them. I think Manti, Logan and St. George Temples are closing, how long though who knows

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, Duncan said:

But the two hour Church rumour has been around for decades as you say, my brother heard it in the early 90's, my Mom heard it before that even, and I wasn't talking about those but this endowment change. I won't fault the guy if it's 50 minutes or 70 minutes but specifics is what I was after, and so far garments aren't even mentioned with the changes and people leaving because they don't/won't wear them. I think Manti, Logan and St. George Temples are closing, how long though who knows

Like I said, many were anticipating the two-hour church rumor.  We can take that one out of the list.  For me, that puts him at being somewhat correct on 2 out of 5.  Again, for me, it's enough to indicate that he probably does have some kind of inside source at some level (though definitely not Q12 level).  If true, this could mean that 1, 3, and 4 may actually have been under discussion (although 4 is really hard for me to believe... improving the fit of garments -- yes -- changing the instruction to wear them night/day -- not so sure about that).

[Duncan]

Just now, rockpond said:

Like I said, many were anticipating the two-hour church rumor.  We can take that one out of the list.  For me, that puts him at being somewhat correct on 2 out of 5.  Again, for me, it's enough to indicate that he probably does have some kind of inside source at some level (though definitely not Q12 level).  If true, this could mean that 1, 3, and 4 may actually have been under discussion (although 4 is really hard for me to believe... improving the fit of garments -- yes -- changing the instruction to wear them night/day -- not so sure about that).

and Mean Gene Okerlund died😭, man, what a day it's been!

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, SettingDogStar said:

I’d honestly be curious at the reaction if they did put the Lecture at the Veil back into the presentation. I seriously don’t think they would considering they seem to be “shortening” it but I would just love to see the reaction.

I was so naive in my TBM days and hadn't heard of the Adam/God theory and now I'm being told the Lecture at the Veil has something to do with this? Wow...

[ksfisher]

25 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I was so naive in my TBM days and hadn't heard of the Adam/God theory and now I'm being told the Lecture at the Veil has something to do with this? Wow...

The lecture was a short summation of what had been taught during the endowment ceremony.  It was in place when I went to the temple for the first time.  Nothing was taught about Adam/God as the Adam/God theory is not church doctrine.

[cinepro]

30 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Like I said, many were anticipating the two-hour church rumor.  We can take that one out of the list.

That's not how it works.

If the list is "A List of Things Bill Reel Got Right", then that's something he got right. 

Sure, if Bill had claimed that an angel had appeared to him and that's where he got the info, then we can say that he got it right but the angel isn't the most likely explanation since people had been predicting (and hoping for it) for a long time.

But he did make a list and that was one he got right.  FWIW, I don't even think Bill was putting much stock into the "list."  It's not like he's trying to be considered a prophet or anything.  It was just a handy reference for all the rumors going around.

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

Sometimes people don't talk very loudly and with the others speaking around me, it can be hard to hear.  Hope my leaning in to hear better never came across that way.  Something to be conscious of in the future.

Seriously.

There is only a narrow horizontal range for the hands to exit the veil without pulling up or down on the veil and men tend to be taller than women by a few inches, so waist height for one might be chest height for the other.

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

Sometimes people don't talk very loudly and with the others speaking around me, it can be hard to hear.  Hope my leaning in to hear better never came across that way.  Something to be conscious of in the future.

I have literally never once even thought to be bothered by something like this. I figure if the woman is doing whatever feels comfortable to her, then I'm all good too. Sometimes I'm really, really grateful not to have been raised in a hypersexualised society!

Edited January 3, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I have literally never once even thought to be bothered by something like this. I figure if the woman is doing whatever feels comfortable to her, then I'm all good too. Sometimes I'm really, really grateful not to have been raised in a hypersexualised society!

And I have never been bothered about hand placement given it is through a veil and precision is not to be expected....and therefore I don't remember any such occurrences happening to me.  I understand why some may be concerned about it though.  Different things affect us differently, probably mostly because past events have caused us to focus on that.  (I am hyper about going up stairs due to ripping my dress once stepping on it and back in the day I started having a panic attack with the veil over my head in the prayer circle, but once sleep disorder got diagnosed no panic attacks anymore so I should stop worrying about that...and yet I do).  I can imagine if a person has been groped before (not in the temple) or has a near and dear one who has, this is something they pay attention to more.

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Jerry Ray said:

I just came from the temple... I can say that there have been very important changes to the endowment. I can't go into any detail because at the very beginning of the endowment we were admonished not to discuss the ordinance with anyone outside the Temple. I can say that the changes shortened the endowment by about 25 minutes. I came away feeling that the Lord, in his infinite wisdom has revealed to his prophet that these changes are needed in the modern world we live in.

 

IMO this is true of previous changes. As society changes, so do the sacrifices and accommodations we are asked to make. For example changes in garment structure to accommodate changes in fashion and pressures put  on members to moderate their dress but remain somewhat mainstream, removal of items and actions that were purposely distorted and/or misinterpreted by some in the Church and most out of the Church, verbiage that has become quaint and prone to ridicule, etc.

 

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

That's not how it works.

If the list is "A List of Things Bill Reel Got Right", then that's something he got right. 

Sure, if Bill had claimed that an angel had appeared to him and that's where he got the info, then we can say that he got it right but the angel isn't the most likely explanation since people had been predicting (and hoping for it) for a long time.

But he did make a list and that was one he got right.  FWIW, I don't even think Bill was putting much stock into the "list."  It's not like he's trying to be considered a prophet or anything.  It was just a handy reference for all the rumors going around.

I called the change in meetings long ago, dropping the third hour and alternating PH/RS with SS. Anyone who works with young children could predict the Primary changes because they are simply common sense. No rumors were involved and I don’t feel any kind for some sort of vindication or self-congratulation.

Seminary is another area I think will be modified.

Edited January 3, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

12 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

If the reports on https://bycommonconsent.com/2019/01/02/the-burden-of-temple-changes-on-women/ end up being true, I am curious to know how you reconcile your one-time clear understanding (and testimony?) of the unbalanced covenanting, and the current disappearance of that imbalance.  Which of the endowment versions are closer to god's truth?

My normal reaction is to let things simmer for a while, engage in some study, discussion, contemplation, and prayer, and wait to see how things shake out. This has served me well in the past and I expect it to do so now.

From the first day, Sister Gui and I have strived to live the covenant we made as we understand it and we will continue to do so. After all, it is the covenant we made.

In our understanding there was nothing in the convent that gave license for domination, abuse, bossiness, condescension, subservience, overbearing, force, nor anything like unto them, but as a perfect vehicle for the blending of our complimenatary but imperfect natures and desires to obey God and create a family. This has kept us undividable through a lot of good and bad things. In fact, if any of that stuff snuck in, we viewed it as sin worthy of repentance and reconciliation.

Never in our marriage did we ever consider that Sister Gui had covenanted in an inferior way to obey God, nor that the specific wording in any way diminished or elevated either of us above the other in that obligation. For me, it was a profoundly awesome solemn mutual act for her to choose through her agency to give herself to me and trust that I could have her trust only as I obeyed God. That is powerful stuff. I imagine many members share(d) our views.

Given current social movements, I can see how some might perceive ours as an unequal or flawed relationship, but we reject that false and uninformed notion without debate. We are sad that so many people today apparently have that kind of attitude to the extent that the covenant maybe had to be changed to accommodate them. It is not without precedence.

Time will tell.

Edited January 3, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[Hamba Tuhan]

10 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Seminary is another area I think will be modified.

I don't entirely know why, but I have this sense too. I think it stems from some of the things Elder Bednar both said and implied when he came here for leadership training a few years back. For a long time, things that may work in Utah or even in the rest of America have been exported to and then modified for everywhere else, but that leaves many of the world's Saints feeling like we're not fully enjoying the entire program of the Church ... or doing it right. And in many cases, it's extremely difficult to even pull off a modified version. I have lived, for example, where seminary was a class held once a week on Sunday evenings, and even then it took some of the participants 90 minutes each way to travel there and back on public transport.

Where I live now, we have close to a dozen high schools in each ward because, unlike what I've seen in America, we prefer many small schools instead of fewer large ones. Not all of these schools even start at the same time. In addition, compulsory education ends after year 10. At that point, the law requires young people to (a) go to work, (b) enrol in an apprenticeship for a trade, or (c) continue their formal schooling at a secondary college (years 11 and 12). These latter are separate to our high schools and often have a come-and-go approach to the school day. A 15-year-old who has finished high school and is working might work the evening shift as a shop assistant in a supermarket and therefore not get home till after midnight. Another youth of the same age in the same ward might begin his or her apprenticeship in carpentry on a construction site each morning at 6:30am. Another youth of the same age in the same ward might attend a college that expects students to begin each day at 9am. Another youth of the same age in the same ward might attend a college where his or her classes are scattered throughout the day, with the earliest one at 10:30am on Tuesdays and Thursdays, at 9:30am on Mondays and Wednesdays and at noon on Fridays.

How do we successfully pull off an early-morning seminary class, including the necessary transport both to and from, in such a situation? That we mostly do so is a testament to many good people making sometimes crazy sacrifices. My sense from what Elder Bednar said is that the Brethren are basically moving in the direction of 'if this doesn't work in Uganda, then we're not going to do it'. I could be wrong, but it feels like we're moving in that direction.

[pogi]

If covenants are removed or changed in the temple, are we still under obligation to live by the covenant as we originally entered into at the time, or does the new presentation and wording of the covenants amend our covenant to the way it should now be understood?  

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

If covenants are removed or changed in the temple, are we still under obligation to live by the covenant as we originally entered into at the time, or does the new presentation and wording of the covenants amend our covenant to the way it should now be understood?  

Yes.

[Bernard Gui]

42 minutes ago, pogi said:

If covenants are removed or changed in the temple, are we still under obligation to live by the covenant as we originally entered into at the time, or does the new presentation and wording of the covenants amend our covenant to the way it should now be understood?  

IMO, the covenant I made is the covenant I keep. I don’t see any provision for changing it. At certain times in the current ceremony I remember in my heart what I promised back in 1966 that may have been changed. I reckon I have just a few more years to go before I won’t be physically or mentally able to do so, but that’s ok. I like dinosaurs even if they are extinct. Soon all us throwbacks will be extinct and the world and Church caravans will move on.

Edited January 3, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[bluebell]

43 minutes ago, pogi said:

If covenants are removed or changed in the temple, are we still under obligation to live by the covenant as we originally entered into at the time, or does the new presentation and wording of the covenants amend our covenant to the way it should now be understood?  

I would think it would amend it. 

[juliann]

48 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

 

Given current social movements, I can see how some might perceive ours as an unequal or flawed relationship, but we reject that false and uninformed notion without debate. We are sad that so many people today apparently have that kind of attitude to the extent that the covenant maybe had to be changed to accommodate them. It is not without precedence.

 

  And the multitudes of women who will now returning to the temple are just as sad that you are so judgmental and unkind to those who see the good in this. It isn't possible after all, that Pres. Nelson gets revelation or anything. 

[Bernard Gui]

18 minutes ago, juliann said:

  And the multitudes of women who will now returning to the temple are just as sad that you are so judgmental and unkind to those who see the good in this. It isn't possible after all, that Pres. Nelson gets revelation or anything. 

And I am just as sad, maybe sadder, that you once again unfairly  pass judgement on me, and for those multitudes who would judge our perception and practice of most sacred covenants we made long ago and have endeavored to keep with all our strength.... but I will not debate that. 😘 

Edited January 3, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[JLHPROF]

49 minutes ago, pogi said:

If covenants are removed or changed in the temple, are we still under obligation to live by the covenant as we originally entered into at the time, or does the new presentation and wording of the covenants amend our covenant to the way it should now be understood?  

So much for all being saved on the same principles.  Let's change eternal covenants to match whatever society says is right.

[Bernard Gui]

10 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So much for all being saved on the same principles.  Let's change eternal covenants to match whatever society says is right.

It is a puzzlement, but I hope that is not the case.

[pogi]

7 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So much for all being saved on the same principles.  Let's change eternal covenants to match whatever society says is right.

Changes happen in eternal covenants.  Circumcision and the Sabbath are two good examples of changing covenants.

I think you should pray before accusing the prophet of anything other than inspiration from above.

 

[JLHPROF]

9 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

 

@JLHPROF - What do you think?  You've studied the changes in covenants today better than anyone I know.  What is the difference in the changes made in the original Church of Christ compared to the changes we make in the LDS Church today?

I  think the covenants God places us under are directly related to the laws we are willing to live and the level that we are at spiritually.

Whenever we reject an eternal law we lose a blessing, but at the same time we lose a piece of the everlasting covenant and the distance between us and God increases.