Masks Required in Temples

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, JAHS said:

In my California ward about 70% of the members don't wear masks and the Bishop is not saying anything about it.

And again I say unto you GRRRR...

Wanton stupidity. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

33 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Don't get me started! Grrrrr. 

Individual 'liberty' ... selflessly paid for with tens of thousands of dollars taken forcibly from the pockets of neighbours!

[Raingirl]

23 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Individual 'liberty' ... selflessly paid for with tens of thousands of dollars taken forcibly from the pockets of neighbours!

Not to mention the suffering and deaths of others. 

[The Nehor]

58 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Individual 'liberty' ... selflessly paid for with tens of thousands of dollars taken forcibly from the pockets of neighbours!

Unvaccinated commies stealing my hard earned money!!!!

[Rivers]

If everybody just got the jab, we wouldn’t be talking about masks anymore.   

Edited September 23, 2021 by Rivers

[Amulek]

11 hours ago, JAHS said:

In my California ward about 70% of the members don't wear masks and the Bishop is not saying anything about it.

Having served in our bishopric throughout the pandemic I can say that this has been one of the tightest tightropes our bishop has had to walk.

I'm not saying that what your bishop is doing is 100% correct for your ward, but I do know that it is a much stickier widget than it appears.

 

[CA Steve]

6 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Having served in our bishopric throughout the pandemic I can say that this has been one of the tightest tightropes our bishop has had to walk.

I'm not saying that what your bishop is doing is 100% correct for your ward, but I do know that it is a much stickier widget than it appears.

 

Ironic isn't it? We are comfortable with a bishop asking us intimate questions about our finances, eating habits and sex lives but draw the line about being told to wear a small covering over our mouths.

 

Edited September 23, 2021 by CA Steve

[Amulek]

23 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Ironic isn't it? We are comfortable with a bishop asking us intimate questions about our finances, eating habits and sex lives but draw the line about being told to wear a small covering over our mouths.

I have been surprised by how much strong resentment has been generated by even the most innocuous urging to follow wise counsel.

But what choice do we have other than to work with people where they are at?

And that process is going to sometimes involve not talking about whatever someone happens to be struggling with, at least for a time. I'm not saying you can't mention it ever, but if you really want people to change then you can't be pounding them over the head with it from pulpit week in and week out either.

That's the balancing I was talking about.

 

[bluebell]

29 minutes ago, Amulek said:

I have been surprised by how much strong resentment has been generated by even the most innocuous urging to follow wise counsel.

But what choice do we have other than to work with people where they are at?

And that process is going to sometimes involve not talking about whatever someone happens to be struggling with, at least for a time. I'm not saying you can't mention it ever, but if you really want people to change then you can't be pounding them over the head with it from pulpit week in and week out either.

That's the balancing I was talking about.

 

This is true, especially considering that most of us are not at all rational and will often not do something simply because someone is trying to make us do it.  We are the type of beings who will knowingly hurt ourselves to prove that someone else can't tell us what to do.  

It's not about freedom, it's about pride and ego.

[Raingirl]

33 minutes ago, Amulek said:

I have been surprised by how much strong resentment has been generated by even the most innocuous urging to follow wise counsel.

But what choice do we have other than to work with people where they are at?

And that process is going to sometimes involve not talking about whatever someone happens to be struggling with, at least for a time. I'm not saying you can't mention it ever, but if you really want people to change then you can't be pounding them over the head with it from pulpit week in and week out either.

That's the balancing I was talking about.

 

But by allowing people not to mask, you are risking the safety of other people.  It’s apparently better to not risk offending one someone, than than do what is necessary to protect the whole ward. 

[HappyJackWagon]

Is there a logic I'm missing about requiring masks at the temple but not at the church buildings?

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, CA Steve said:

We are comfortable with a bishop asking us intimate questions about our finances, eating habits and sex lives but draw the line about being told to wear a small covering over our mouths

We are?

In my 40 adult years in the church, no bishop has asked me ONE of those questions, nor have I asked those questions when I was a bishop myself!

Counseling people? Yes, but bringing up the topic? Never.

[Duncan]

10 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Is there a logic I'm missing about requiring masks at the temple but not at the church buildings?

 

in our province masks must be worn at all public buildings, which would include the temple so for us this announcement is moot

[bluebell]

41 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Is there a logic I'm missing about requiring masks at the temple but not at the church buildings?

 

My personal opinion is that it’s the difference between church, which is a weekly event open to everyone, and the temple, which is an occasional event open to a limited number of members.

If some members are going to refuse to be anywhere masks are required, I think the first presidency would rather they refuse to attend the temple than church.

[CA Steve]

52 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

We are?

In my 40 adult years in the church, no bishop has asked me ONE of those questions, nor have I asked those questions when I was a bishop myself!

Counseling people? Yes, but bringing up the topic? Never.

Obviously we grew up in different churches.

As a missionary conducting baptismal interviews I asked those questions. I have sat through numerous tithing settlements where those question were discussed, and the WOW is part of every temple interview.

I suspect that the problem is you and I use words so differently that communication is not possible.

[mfbukowski]

24 minutes ago, bluebell said:

My personal opinion is that it’s the difference between church, which is a weekly event open to everyone, and the temple, which is an occasional event open to a limited number of members.

If some members are going to refuse to be anywhere masks are required, I think the first presidency would rather they refuse to attend the temple than church.

Think about it, there is more physical contact in the temple, you can't just bump elbows.

[mfbukowski]

10 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Obviously we grew up in different churches.

As a missionary conducting baptismal interviews I asked those questions. I have sat through numerous tithing settlements where those question were discussed, and the WOW is part of every temple interview.

I suspect that the problem is you and I use words so differently that communication is not possible.

That's a good enough excuse to ignore each other. Somebody asks me about my sexual activities with my dear wife, they may get punched in the nose.

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Think about it, there is more physical contact in the temple, you can't just bump elbows.

Have you been to the temple since the covid changes?  You are right in that there is more contact, but not much more, at least as far as the endowment (I'm not sure if anything in other ordinances have been changed to less contact.  Maybe you or someone else knows).

But I think that the workers are also mostly older members and so that brings up the risk as well, coupled with those times when contact has to happen.

[mfbukowski]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Have you been to the temple since the covid changes?  You are right in that there is more contact, but not much more, at least as far as the endowment (I'm not sure if anything in other ordinances have been changed to less contact.  Maybe you or someone else knows).

But I think that the workers are also mostly older members and so that brings up the risk as well, coupled with those times when contact has to happen.

Yes I am a temple worker. There is still a veil ceremony.  Think about being behind the Veil during a large session and you are old.  Would you want those folks to be wearing masks?

 

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Yes I am a temple worker. There is still a veil ceremony.  Think about being behind the Veil during a large session and you are old.  Would you want those folks to be wearing masks?

 

Being at the veil is probably one of the lesser problematic places before masks were required, since there is a fabric between the two people who are speaking.  But I get what you are saying.

[mtomm]

On 9/22/2021 at 12:51 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

This was already being done in the temple where I serve (it has been closed since August for remodeling). 
 

Templegoers by and large will follow direction from Church leaders without complaint or murmuring. It’s in their nature. 

My neighbors who work in the temple quit because they were required to wear masks. I'm more than a little shocked. 

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, mtomm said:

My neighbors who work in the temple quit because they were required to wear masks. I'm more than a little shocked. 

Which temple?

[mtomm]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Which temple?

Rexburg. I'm wondering if it will impact how many sessions they will be able to hold if there are more defectors. They are pretty typical of the folks around here. They don't believe in vaccinations, masks, social distancing or that covid is harmful and that once you've had it you don't have to worry about getting it again. 
I was the only person wearing a mask last Sunday at sacrament meeting. 

[Scott Lloyd]

5 minutes ago, mtomm said:

Rexburg. I'm wondering if it will impact how many sessions they will be able to hold if there are more defectors. They are pretty typical of the folks around here. They don't believe in vaccinations, masks, social distancing or that covid is harmful and that once you've had it you don't have to worry about getting it again. 
I was the only person wearing a mask last Sunday at sacrament meeting. 

Seems to me that in a college town like Rexburg they’d be able to call enough younger folks from among the campus community who don’t share such attitudes to make up any shortage. But I have no way of knowing. 

[bOObOO]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Yes I am a temple worker. There is still a veil ceremony.  Think about being behind the Veil during a large session and you are old.  Would you want those folks to be wearing masks?

 

I'd mainly just hope they washed their hands often, like every time after touching someone else's hand.   I recommend a bottle of Purell to everyone I know who is going to a temple.  And at least 6 feet of distance between people whenever possible.