Talking Covenants at church

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, Rain said:

 

There have been a number of things I cared about.  This most recently. Other times there is a story I am researching and start to find that similar things have happened before and I want to keep them straight.  Other times I'm looking for a sale or a coupon or frequent flier related things and I want the info current and not from 3 years ago.  Just so many instances that the date makes a difference.

Because I was trying to find out when the church started being more specific about it. If that was from 10 years ago my memory was not correct. If from 1 year ago it might be correct and good to search further.

I was baptized at age 14 in 1966, the only member of my family to join the church. I was endowed in 1972 in the Los Angeles Temple. I received no preparatory instruction whatsoever. And no explanatory instruction thereafter. I did not grow up in the church, and knew virtually nothing about what happened in the temple, except for baptism for dead, which I learned about from the missionaries, until I was maybe about 18, I guess. Other things, like learning gospel basics took center stage with me. 

I know that there are members of the church, even ones who were born in the church, who received their endowment with great confusion and bewilderment. Some never grow out of it, I guess. But for some reason, from the start I was perfectly content with what I saw and did there, and over time the whole thing has become one of the most glorious experiences I have ever participated in. I am a part-time ordinance worker in the London Temple now, and I love the work. It feels noble, and it feels full of light. 

[Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

When the Church has discussed something publicly has been relevant in a number of discussions I have had; for example, accusations that the Church is just responding to a current issue can be rebutted by showing content posted before the latest controversy.

That's a good reason, yes.

But does it help those accusers if they find that the thing under accusation has been publicly available for some time? My impression from discussions held here on MDDB is that they don't care. Because the main thing with these people is to find fault and bite backs. 

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

That's a good reason, yes.

But does it help those accusers if they find that the thing under accusation has been publicly available for some time? My impression from discussions held here on MDDB is that they don't care. Because the main thing with these people is to find fault and bite backs. 

I do not generally concern myself with the reaction of accusers as those rarely change in my experience. Much of the reason I do research and post responses is for the readers of the claims and arguments, the ones that might be persuaded to change to a more negative view if such arguments are left unchallenged. 

[Stargazer]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

I do not generally concern myself with the reaction of accusers as those rarely change in my experience. Much of the reason I do research and post responses is for the readers of the claims and arguments, the ones that might be persuaded to change to a more negative view if such arguments are left unchallenged. 

And there are those, yes. They are very frequently silent, but we must still keep them in mind. But I think you meant "more positive view."

Edited September 26, 2022 by Stargazer

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

I was baptized at age 14 in 1966, the only member of my family to join the church. I was endowed in 1972 in the Los Angeles Temple. I received no preparatory instruction whatsoever. And no explanatory instruction thereafter. I did not grow up in the church, and knew virtually nothing about what happened in the temple, except for baptism for dead, which I learned about from the missionaries, until I was maybe about 18, I guess. Other things, like learning gospel basics took center stage with me. 

I know that there are members of the church, even ones who were born in the church, who received their endowment with great confusion and bewilderment. Some never grow out of it, I guess. But for some reason, from the start I was perfectly content with what I saw and did there, and over time the whole thing has become one of the most glorious experiences I have ever participated in. I am a part-time ordinance worker in the London Temple now, and I love the work. It feels noble, and it feels full of light. 

I appreciate getting to know you better (one thing I liked about watching your castle video was hearing what your voice sounded like), but what does this have to do with my post?  I'm missing the connection.

[Stargazer]

2 minutes ago, Rain said:

I appreciate getting to know you better (one thing I liked about watching your castle video was hearing what your voice sounded like), but what does this have to do with my post?  I'm missing the connection.

It's my fault, going off on a tangent. The topic was the covenants made in the endowment, and the church not really talking about it much, then there is that relatively new page describing the covenants, and when was this information first made more generally available? This triggered thoughts in my scattered head about my own experience with the temple and all that went on during the endowment, and I just started free-associating all that.

Sometimes I write things to the point, but this time I was off reminiscing instead. My apologies!

Thanks for liking my castle video, and I hope my voice wasn't too traumatizing!  

 

[Rain]

1 minute ago, Stargazer said:

It's my fault, going off on a tangent. The topic was the covenants made in the endowment, and the church not really talking about it much, then there is that relatively new page describing the covenants, and when was this information first made more generally available? This triggered thoughts in my scattered head about my own experience with the temple and all that went on during the endowment, and I just started free-associating all that.

Sometimes I write things to the point, but this time I was off reminiscing instead. My apologies!

Thanks for liking my castle video, and I hope my voice wasn't too traumatizing!  

 

Thanks.  

Your voice was different than I expected.  More tenor.  And I don't mean this in a bad way but it was also friendlier than I expected. It's not that I thought it would be unfriendly, it's just that few have the "friendly" tone you have.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

. I am a part-time ordinance worker in the London Temple now, and I love the work.

Do you have full time ordinance workers at the London Temple? I ask, because I thought all temple ordinance workers were part time. 

[Stargazer]

31 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Do you have full time ordinance workers at the London Temple? I ask, because I thought all temple ordinance workers were part time. 

Yes, it appears we do. Some are serving full-time missions at the temple, some from the US, and others more local. A long-time English friend of mine since 1970 was serving as an assistant recorder at the temple when I came to England to live back in 2017. He and his wife lived in temple accommodations instead of their home in another part of the country. Most of those who were serving full-time from the US when Covid hit (and I don't know how many there were) all went home when the church shut down the temples due to Covid. I am back in "training" due to the break in service, and my trainer is from the US serving here. There is also a sister from Portugal who seems to be full-time serving in the distribution center located on the temple grounds. She's been there every time we've stopped by, so I assume she's here full-time. Then again, she may actually be a church employee, not a missionary.

It may be the case that most US temples serve a very large temple district and part-timers are all that are necessary. Not here, though.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Stargazer

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, Stargazer said:

For some reason, from the start I was perfectly content with what I saw and did there, and over time the whole thing has become one of the most glorious experiences I have ever participated in. I am a part-time ordinance worker in the London Temple now, and I love the work. It feels noble, and it feels full of light. 

I remember walking into the temple proper for the very first time and feeling like I'd gone home to a place that I only partially remembered but deeply loved. For me, it was an obvious extension of everything that I had been learning and experiencing as a member of the Church. I loved it!

After my own endowment, I took the opportunity to do a second endowment session before leaving. Then I didn't want to leave. I remember standing at the glass doors, looking out on the car park (and world) outside, and trying to figure out a way I could convince the workers to just let me stay forever. But it doesn't work that way. The Lord invites us into His presence so that we can then take His presence/presents out into the world.

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Do you have full time ordinance workers at the London Temple? I ask, because I thought all temple ordinance workers were part time. 

We have some too. They serve as temple missionaries and have their own apartments at temple accommodation. Some just spend their two years (18 months?) living there. Others whose homes are closer will go home on Saturday and come back on Monday evening.

[Stargazer]

On 9/27/2022 at 12:50 AM, Rain said:

Thanks.  

Your voice was different than I expected.  More tenor.  And I don't mean this in a bad way but it was also friendlier than I expected. It's not that I thought it would be unfriendly, it's just that few have the "friendly" tone you have.

I have to thank you again for this. Believe it or not, it's been warming my heart for the past two months!

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

I have to thank you again for this. Believe it or not, it's been warming my heart for the past two months!

That makes me smile.

[Tacenda]

On 9/26/2022 at 6:29 PM, Stargazer said:

Yes, it appears we do. Some are serving full-time missions at the temple, some from the US, and others more local. A long-time English friend of mine since 1970 was serving as an assistant recorder at the temple when I came to England to live back in 2017. He and his wife lived in temple accommodations instead of their home in another part of the country. Most of those who were serving full-time from the US when Covid hit (and I don't know how many there were) all went home when the church shut down the temples due to Covid. I am back in "training" due to the break in service, and my trainer is from the US serving here. There is also a sister from Portugal who seems to be full-time serving in the distribution center located on the temple grounds. She's been there every time we've stopped by, so I assume she's here full-time. Then again, she may actually be a church employee, not a missionary.

It may be the case that most US temples serve a very large temple district and part-timers are all that are necessary. Not here, though.

My sister-in-law and her husband served a mission in the London temple three or four years ago. 

[Stargazer]

On 12/7/2022 at 2:36 AM, Tacenda said:

My sister-in-law and her husband served a mission in the London temple three or four years ago. 

Unfortunately, that was a bit before my time, so I doubt I met them, but it's a small world.

Currently at the temple are relatives of people I've known for a number of years. One family in our ward moved to Qatar on an employment contract, and the husband's father is serving at the temple. We were just talking about it yesterday.