Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Duncan

Temple Changes?

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, OGHoosier said:

Oh crap. My dad already thinks that the Church's not holding weekly services is disobeying Matthew 10:28: 

When he gets wind of this I'm going to have to talk him down again...

As long as he doesn't try snake handling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The press can and will do what they want. The request from the First Presidency is to “members and friends”:

Given the sacredness of the temple ceremonies, we ask our members and friends not to engage in speculation or public discussions about these changes.” 

Even though the text of the ceremony has long been accessible from unauthorized sources, Church leaders have never approved of members discussing in detail in public the sacred temple ceremonies. 

ooh, good eye!

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The press can and will do what they want. The request from the First Presidency is to “members and friends”:

Given the sacredness of the temple ceremonies, we ask our members and friends not to engage in speculation or public discussions about these changes.” 

Even though the text of the ceremony has long been accessible from unauthorized sources, Church leaders have never approved of members discussing in detail in public the sacred temple ceremonies. 

I'm signed on the the sacredness, but why must it be thus so?   Orson Pratt didn't think so, and published the text of the sealing ceremony in Washington D.C.  The text of the endowment seems to have been discussed freely during the Smoot hearings with subpoenaed church authorities.

Edited by Bob Crockett
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Bob Crockett said:

I'm signed on the the sacredness, but why must it be thus so?   Orson Pratt didn't think so, and published the text of the sealing ceremony in Washington D.C.  The text of the endowment seems to have been discussed freely during the Smoot hearings with subpoenaed church authorities.

I thought that the texts had to be published in Washington D.C. or the government wouldn't allow temples to operate?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The big changes Adam has a 4X4 truck and Eve has an iPhone.  The first selfie was taken by Eve.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The press can and will do what they want. The request from the First Presidency is to “members and friends”:

Given the sacredness of the temple ceremonies, we ask our members and friends not to engage in speculation or public discussions about these changes.” 

Even though the text of the ceremony has long been accessible from unauthorized sources, Church leaders have never approved of members discussing in detail in public the sacred temple ceremonies. 

In other words,

"This is a huge announcement guaranteed to cause discussion and speculation, but don't discuss it or speculate about it"

Best wishes. ;)

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, halconero said:

Huh, that aspect totally slipped my mind. I’m getting married on Friday.

Congrats!  Big smile on my face.  Have lots and lots of fun.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, bluebell said:

I thought that the texts had to be published in Washington D.C. or the government wouldn't allow temples to operate?

No.  

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

In other words,

"This is a huge announcement guaranteed to cause discussion and speculation, but don't discuss it or speculate about it"

Best wishes. ;)

 

Each of us has the gift of moral agency. To  me that means curbing one’s own impulses and inclinations when necessary or appropriate. Or, to put it another way, we are placed in mortality to act and not be acted upon. Determined to do so, I’m making this my last post even peripherally related to the matter. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:
16 hours ago, bluebell said:

I thought that the texts had to be published in Washington D.C. or the government wouldn't allow temples to operate?

No.  

A similar issue actually happened  when President Hinckley, on assignment from President McKay, went to install the equipment and Endowment film in the Swiss Temple in 1955.  After landing in Switzerland  a customs agent informed him that his “church films and lectures” needed to be reviewed by the federal film board. He was forced to leave the spiritually sensitive films with the agent over the weekend.

After much fasting and pleading with the Lord to keep the sacred films safe, and after another tense conversation with the customs agent, President Hinckley was able to get the movies to the temple without anything being compromised. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Orson Pratt did not publish the text because federal authorities demanded it. 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Orson Pratt did not publish the text because federal authorities demanded it. 

Why did he publish it?

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

image.jpeg.db070acbbfef0db91ddd3a678e2bf99a.jpeg

"I have trouble ... touching things."

–Bill Murray as the title character, Bob Wiley, in What About Bob? (1991)

A few years ago, when I worked in a mental health support capacity, I mentioned this film to one of the therapists.  He was pretty straight-laced, so I thought it would be outside his ken (no pun intended ;)), and that, therefore, some background explanation would be in order.  He surprised me by saying that he made a tradition of watching the film once a year. ;) :D :rofl:

One of our sons named his dog Bob in honor of that Bob.  He's just a little dog, very timid and doesn't smile much but he acts pretty much like that Bob acted.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Each of us has the gift of moral agency. To  me that means curbing one’s own impulses and inclinations when necessary or appropriate. Or, to put it another way, we are placed in mortality to act and not be acted upon. Determined to do so, I’m making this my last post even peripherally related to the matter. 

Likewise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, halconero said:

Huh, that aspect totally slipped my mind. I’m getting married on Friday.

Finally something happy! Congratulations! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The sacred elements not to be discussed publicly are clearly stated in the endowment.

The idea that no other specific details of the temple be discussed is not a rule but a social norm in the current LDS community.  We have expanded the restriction beyond the intention.

That idea is not a "social norm" but an idea that some, I think the minority in our society, would like to impose upon all of the others.  And the "We" you mention are those who have accepted that idea as a mandate.

I think it's better to freely talk about everything that goes on in our temples except for the things that we covenant not to share with others, which would be the names and tokens and signs we are told should be considered sacred.

But some people, again I think the minority in our society, are not comfortable with that idea and for some reason would rather say as little as possible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, halconero said:

Huh, that aspect totally slipped my mind. I’m getting married on Friday.

YaY for you and your future spouse and all of your posterity.  I hope the 2 of you will have joy together forever even if sometimes you become sad or frustrated about... whatever.

Share this post


Link to post

In a temple class I was once reprimanded for mentioning there is a prayer circle.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, mtomm said:

In a temple class I was once reprimanded for mentioning there is a prayer circle.

If I had been there with you I would have reprimanded the person who reprimanded you for mentioning that.  Some teachers need to be taught how to teach better.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Determined to do so, I’m making this my last post even peripherally related to the matter.

Righteous!  👊

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Calm said:

Why did he publish it?

He was thousands of miles away from the Salt Lake Valley and couldn't ask anybody.  He did it to show the world that the Church wasn' t hiding anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:
2 hours ago, Calm said:

Why did he publish it?

He was thousands of miles away from the Salt Lake Valley and couldn't ask anybody.  He did it to show the world that the Church wasn' t hiding anything. 

I was going through a library a few years ago in California and found an old book some ex-member had written in the 1940s that had the entire temple ordinance script in it.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, JAHS said:

I was going through a library a few years ago in California and found an old book some ex-member had written in the 1940s that had the entire temple ordinance script in it.

That's different.  Orson Pratt was the authorized Church representative in Washington D.C.

However, Brigham Young was upset with Pratt over this.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...