Disapointment in Temple, how to get over?

[MustardSeed]

It is very possible to pray sincerely and respectfully while sitting.  

Kneeling is for home.  Others kneeling in prayer looks very intimate to me and is not for public in our religion imo. 

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Good post. Very instructive. Matron is a title reserved for specific persons in the temple administration. Other females, like their male counterparts, are properly called ordinance workers. 
 

But I wondered why you used the singular <their> in “If it’s a matron that will be on their name badge.” Here is an instance where the person referenced is unequivocally and unambiguously female, so you could easily have said, “If it’s a matron, that will be on <her> name badge.” 
 

Sometimes, I get this irrational feeling that people use the singular they/their/them —when there’s no good reason to do it — just to bug me. (Just kidding)

I do it because I am trying to change the English language. When cases where gender is clear I do not care and use the singular but having to type “his or her” or “he or she” gets awkward very quickly. The sooner the new usage is standard the better. It is a weird hill to fight for but it is mine.

So if I ever do it to you it is not to annoy you. That is just a side perk.

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Was something being taken too far? It's a little hard to imagine what could have been done to declare a universal temple ban on kneeling in the Celestial Room. Any examples? Stories?

I work in the temple. Some people in the Church are nuts. You already know this. Sometimes those people attend the temple. And sometimes they want to get dramatic in the Celestial Room. Rules exist to help protect everyone else from the antics of our less stable fellow Saints.

9 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Does the anti-kneeling rule in the Celestial Room seem strange to anyone else? Or is it just me who finds it odd?

The whole 'system' has a much broader view than any one person's individual experiences. It's only odd to you because you haven't had to deal with some of the genuine oddness temple workers sometimes have to respond to.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I do it because I am trying to change the English language. When cases where gender is clear I do not care and use the singular but having to type “his or her” or “he or she” gets awkward very quickly. The sooner the new usage is standard the better. It is a weird hill to fight for but it is mine.

So if I ever do it to you it is not to annoy you. That is just a side perk.

It strikes me as far more awkward to use plural pronouns to refer to a singe person or entity. It sounds especially silly when you get to using the reflexive pronoun (themselves). 
 

So I will resist your campaign, not specifically to annoy you but to keep the language free of faddish corruption. 

Edited October 1, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Nacho2dope]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Counterpoint: At least you get to have a good laugh when he is burning in hell.

8 minutes? I would have long since just shoved them out of the way:

I should have but after 3 minutes and then seeing me I just wanted to see how long they would stand there. 

[Tacenda]

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Good post. Very instructive. Matron is a title reserved for specific persons in the temple administration. Other females, like their male counterparts, are properly called ordinance workers. 
 

But I wondered why you used the singular <their> in “If it’s a matron that will be on their name badge.” Here is an instance where the person referenced is unequivocally and unambiguously female, so you could easily have said, “If it’s a matron, that will be on <her> name badge.” 
 

Sometimes, I get this irrational feeling that people use the singular they/their/them —when there’s no good reason to do it — just to bug me. (Just kidding)

What he said following, was "matrons". It made perfect sense to use "their", IMNSHO.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Tacenda

[2BizE]

Two thoughts to possibly solve your problem

1) go to the Vancouver temple instead

2) wear noise canceling headphones 

Sometimes, it is too much effort to  change people, and changing yourself and your environment are all you can change.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

What he said following, was "matrons". It made perfect sense to use "their", IMNSHO.

No.  He said, “If it’s a matron, it will be on their name badge.” 
 

If he had said, “If it’s a matrons ...” it wouldn’t have made sense. 

[stemelbow]

On 9/29/2019 at 9:33 AM, Duncan said:

Not to get personal but how do you get over bad experiences in the Temple? I'm not talking about Demonic posession or running into someone from Calgary( 😣) but constant unanswered prayers, too noisy in Celestial room or other things like that? in other aspects of life if you have regular bad experiences as a grocery store you just shop elsewhere

radiofreemormon just did a podcast on unanswered prayers.  I haven't listened to it yet, but I saw it.  Might want to check it out.

I don't know what you should do other than stop attending.  I mean I remember some noise in the Celestial room but it never bothered me, in fact, I enjoyed the camaraderie myself so I might have been the culprit at least on occasion.  Enjoying each other was a leading reason why I ever went to the temple, so I'm not sure what the problem here is.  

My take on unanswered prayers is all prayers are answered whether they are directly answered or not, at least that's the message I got out of church.  Its either you aren't praying hard enough or God is answering your prayer by not answering it essentially.  To break that down, it was either they answers will come in God's time, or it was a bad question/concern and God's answer is in not answering it because you either don't need it, know the answer already or shouldn't be asking.  I'm guessing you're praying hard enough so maybe the answer is in the non answer for you.  

[Duncan]

17 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

radiofreemormon just did a podcast on unanswered prayers.  I haven't listened to it yet, but I saw it.  Might want to check it out.

I don't know what you should do other than stop attending.  I mean I remember some noise in the Celestial room but it never bothered me, in fact, I enjoyed the camaraderie myself so I might have been the culprit at least on occasion.  Enjoying each other was a leading reason why I ever went to the temple, so I'm not sure what the problem here is.  

My take on unanswered prayers is all prayers are answered whether they are directly answered or not, at least that's the message I got out of church.  Its either you aren't praying hard enough or God is answering your prayer by not answering it essentially.  To break that down, it was either they answers will come in God's time, or it was a bad question/concern and God's answer is in not answering it because you either don't need it, know the answer already or shouldn't be asking.  I'm guessing you're praying hard enough so maybe the answer is in the non answer for you.  

these are wise words , thank you as always!

[Tacenda]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

No.  He said, “If it’s a matron, it will be on their name badge.” 
 

If he had said, “If it’s a matrons ...” it wouldn’t have made sense. 

I c/p'd the sentences in his quote: "If it's a Matron that will be on their name badge. Matrons run the complaint department for sister ordinance workers "

He's grouping them together, so I think "their" works as well. 

[Stargazer]

On 9/29/2019 at 9:07 PM, Coop said:

This is an interesting topic.  I had an experience in the Calgary Temple that I had trouble processing.  We were in the second ordinance room when a cell phone went off.  After two rings this brother answers it.  I sat there thinking this has to be the weirdest experience ever.  Then just as everyone was getting over their shock his phone rings again, and again he answered it.  This is as close as I have been to a demonic experience in the Calgary Temple.

I decided that the next time this happens I'm going to get up, grab the phone, and take it out to the front desk.  I do things like this but I don't recommend it to others unless your real old and you don't care what people think of you.

All the best,

Bob

With signs at the recommend desk and in the locker rooms saying to turn your phone off and leave it in your locker, was this brother illiterate or blind?  No, don't answer that. 

When I was manning the recommend desk one day, a sister came to the desk but had left her recommend in the car with her phone, so she couldn't call her husband to bring her recommend with him when he came in (he was finding a parking space). I asked her why she left it in the car, as she was welcome to bring it in, just turn it off. She replied that she wanted to leave the world behind, not bring it in with her!  Smart lady!

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I c/p'd the sentences in his quote: "If it's a Matron that will be on their name badge. Matrons run the complaint department for sister ordinance workers "

He's grouping them together, so I think "their" works as well. 

But the possessive pronoun “their” occurs in the first sentence, the one with the singular noun, not in the second sentence. My point is it would have been more appropriate in this instance — and just as easy — to use the gendered pronoun. I quite disagree that “their” works as well. 

The point I’m arguing is that if you can easily use a gendered pronoun — that is, where the specific gender is not in question — you should do it. There is no good reason not to. 

[Stargazer]

23 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Does the anti-kneeling rule in the Celestial Room seem strange to anyone else? Or is it just me who finds it odd?

I had never run into this before (the wife and I are ordinance workers in the London temple, and she has "supervised" the CR before, so I will have to ask her if she has gotten this instruction.

When you first brought it up I was slightly puzzled, but upon reflection I can see it as very reasonable, as far as the intent behind it.  A person quietly praying while standing or sitting is not in any way calling attention to himself, but someone kneeling in prayer in a more-or-less public place does seem to be calling attention to himself -- just as they would if doing so in the midst of an outside gathering of people.  Now, if someone is "taking the knee" so as not to have to bend way over to speak quitely to someone who is sitting, I am not so sure this can be counted the same.  I am wondering if the ordinance worker was taking it too far?  Like I said, I will check with the wife.

[Stargazer]

I do wonder when the church will start issuing temple recommends with photo id on them?  Or require a photo be taken during the t/r interview, the photo put into the church's t/r database, and then the recommend desk worker gets the photo displayed when the patron comes to the temple?  This would surely cut down on people lending out their recommends.

[Bernard Gui]

12 hours ago, 2BizE said:

Two thoughts to possibly solve your problem

1) go to the Vancouver temple instead

2) wear noise canceling headphones 

Sometimes, it is too much effort to  change people, and changing yourself and your environment are all you can change.

I will confess a heretical pet peeve here.

I often wear wax earplugs in the temple chapel because the mechanical organ hymns make me crazy. Same thing if there is a live player, especially if he/she is not very skilled. I feel like I’m in a funeral parlor. 

I want to read a scripture, think, or pray, but the words of the hymn drive everything else out of my head....probably because I’ve been a ward organist for decades and have most of the hymns memorized.

Sometimes my fingers actually play along with the organ! I’ve asked a temple worker friend if they could at least please just turn the volume way down, but no, couldn’t be done. So I try to spend as little time in there as possible.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

5 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

I do wonder when the church will start issuing temple recommends with photo id on them?  Or require a photo be taken during the t/r interview, the photo put into the church's t/r database, and then the recommend desk worker gets the photo displayed when the patron comes to the temple?  This would surely cut down on people lending out their recommends.

Yes. I would go for photo ID. And disgruntled people selling or giving away their recommends. 

[Stargazer]

5 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I will confess a heretical pet peeve here.

I often wear wax earplugs in the temple chapel because the mechanical organ hymns make me crazy. I feel like I’m in a funeral parlor. Sister Gui thinks I’m nuts.I want to read a scripture, think, or pray, but the words of the hymn drive everything else out of my head....probably because I’ve been a ward organist for decades and have most of the hymns memorized. Sometimes my fingers actually play along with the organ! I’ve asked a temple worker friend if they could at least please just turn the volume way down, but no, couldn’t be done. So I try to spend as little time in there as possible.

I'm not as sensitized to this as you, but yeah, I am not particularly pleased with the recordings.  Sounds like poorly-mastered MIDI to me.  I recall with fondness the living organist playing in the Chapel at the Seattle temple, once upon a time.

[Scott Lloyd]

17 hours ago, Ahab said:

I think that would qualify as ward business that should be taken care of by someone in the bishopric even if they were still up on that stand at the head of the chapel.  Notifying the people of those cars that they need to be moved so they can bear one another's burdens.

Not during the sacrament, of course, but during the sacrament meeting someone could go up to the stand with a note to say which cars were blocking someone from leaving the parking lot.

For some reason some people may not feel comfortable saying something about it but sometimes people need to speak up to let others know they need to take care of something to help someone else out!

In this instance, the other ward's meeting was quite far along in progress, and it would have been very awkward to interrupt it for a matter like this. Plus, I don't think it would have solved the problem going forward. The next week there would still be a long string of cars parked at the red curb, and probably every week thereafter. 

I don't blame the bishop's counselor for not wanting to make an issue of it at that moment, especially when I was there to provide transportation.

[Ahab]

20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In this instance, the other ward's meeting was quite far along in progress, and it would have been very awkward to interrupt it for a matter like this. Plus, I don't think it would have solved the problem going forward. The next week there would still be a long string of cars parked at the red curb, and probably every week thereafter. 

I don't blame the bishop's counselor for not wanting to make an issue of it at that moment, especially when I was there to provide transportation.

Going forward your bishopric might want to consider placing some of those orange cones by those red curbs to help people get the idea that they shouldn't be parking there.  And an announcement or 2 from the pulpit may help to make the problem go away too.

Otherwise you're likely to continue to have people parking there while thinking it is okay.  People can be quite dense sometimes, even when they are latter-day saints.

[HappyJackWagon]

18 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

My opinion is that if they truly desire to humble themselves, the Lord will discern that desire in their hearts without their having to make an outward show. 

I agree with that.

But it could also be said for any other "outward" show of piety. Any outward expression of an inner commitment could be deemed unnecessary. Bowing heads and closing eyes? Unnecessary because God knows your heart. Ordinances? Where does it end  

[HappyJackWagon]

16 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

It is very possible to pray sincerely and respectfully while sitting.  

Kneeling is for home.  Others kneeling in prayer looks very intimate to me and is not for public in our religion imo. 

Of course a prayer while sitting can be sincere and respectful. No one said otherwise. I can't tell if you're joking.

If you're not, are you saying that kneeling is inappropriate except at home? I mean, really?

So should a person praying give first consideration about how it might look to other people? I'm scratching my head on this one. It seems far less proper to critique other's prayer style, than to actually allow someone to kneel as they pray to God. If they really wanted to go all out they'd prostrate themselves.  

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

I had never run into this before (the wife and I are ordinance workers in the London temple, and she has "supervised" the CR before, so I will have to ask her if she has gotten this instruction.

When you first brought it up I was slightly puzzled, but upon reflection I can see it as very reasonable, as far as the intent behind it.  A person quietly praying while standing or sitting is not in any way calling attention to himself, but someone kneeling in prayer in a more-or-less public place does seem to be calling attention to himself -- just as they would if doing so in the midst of an outside gathering of people.  Now, if someone is "taking the knee" so as not to have to bend way over to speak quitely to someone who is sitting, I am not so sure this can be counted the same.  I am wondering if the ordinance worker was taking it too far?  Like I said, I will check with the wife.

I would argue that the only problem I could possibly see with kneeling is the current/modern cultural acceptance of kneeling. There's nothing wrong in and of itself, but if one thinks it's inappropriate, it is more reflective of that person, and not the person actually kneeling in prayer. It's as if some are arguing that the perception of others of the kneeling prayer is more important than the person kneeling in prayer. And this is in the temple...a religious context, and kneeling in prayer is inappropriate? I find this pretty funny.

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Going forward your bishopric might want to consider placing some of those orange cones by those red curbs to help people get the idea that they shouldn't be parking there.  And an announcement or 2 from the pulpit may help to make the problem go away too.

Otherwise you're likely to continue to have people parking there while thinking it is okay.  People can be quite dense sometimes, even when they are latter-day saints.

Yeah.

It's quite a knotty problem. When the parking lot is filled to capacity, and cars are already parked up and down the busy street next to the meetinghouse, people are going to park wherever they can -- or they'll give up and go home. I think it's too much to expect of single adults that they car pool to church every week. And walking to church is scarcely an option with a single-adult ward, because members typically come from miles away.

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yeah.

It's quite a knotty problem. When the parking lot is filled to capacity, and cars are already parked up and down the busy street next to the meetinghouse, people are going to park wherever they can -- or they'll give up and go home. I think it's too much to expect of single adults that they car pool to church every week. And walking to church is scarcely an option with a single-adult ward, because members typically come from miles away.

Bishops are often blessed with inspiration from God.  I'm sure they'll figure out what to do, eventually.  Another option would be that if they are going to park there they give their keys to somebody so that those cars can be moved when people in other cars are blocked from leaving because of those cars that are parked there.  Or maybe they could be among the first to get leave after the meetings so they'd be gone before the people in the other cars wanted to leave.  Or maybe as long as everyone knows who those cars belong to they can just ask those people to move their cars when the people in the other cars are ready to leave.  Lots and lots of possibilities without having to resort to taking people to their homes because their cars were blocked from leaving, and then having to take them back to the building to pick their cars up later long after the meetings have ended.  What that bishop's counselor had to go through isn't something I would want him to have to go through again.