hzdbl5

This doesn't really address your comments but thought I would share. While on my mission in Albuquerque NM in the early 80s we listened to conference via a telephone line at the church building. It was, however, broadcast live in the Salt Lake area. Following one of the Saturday sessions (morning or afternoon, I don't recall which) a tape of the broadcast was put on a flight from SLC to ABQ. I was assigned in the mission office at the time so my companion and I ran down to the airport to collect the tape. We then took it over to one of the local network affiliates who played the session Sunday morning at 7:00 am as a public service. Shortly after 9:00 we were back at the affiliate to collect the tape and take it back to the airport for its return trip to Salt Lake. Today's technology pretty much eliminates stories like this.

As noted, once ordained a bishop, always a bishop. If I were to be called to serve as a bishop again I would not have to be ordained, simply set apart and receive keys (physical and spiritual). Being ordained a bishop does not affect your priesthood line of authority as it is an Aaronic Priesthood ordination so your line remains with your high priest ordination. While I served as bishop pretty much everyone referred to me as "Bishop xxx" except when we were socializing with close friends. Our Relief Society president was a good friend so I would start my texts with "Sis. RSP" or "Susan" so she would know immediately the context of my text. Same thing with her husband who was later called as the ward Young Men president. While playing golf with one of my counselors and our ward financial clerk I would ask them repeatedly to use my first name while playing rather than "Bishop xxx". Most of the people who still refer to me as "Bishop xxx" are those who moved into the ward while I was serving and that was all they knew me as for some number of years. Most others refer to me as "Bro. xxx". Although if I raise my hand in a class I'm usually called upon as "Bishop xxx". Not sure why that is; maybe doing so gives my comments added weight? Bottom line for me? I'll answer to just about anything.

Arguably the best player ever. He is my GOAT.

I've never turned down a calling but vetoed one (sort of) when a bishopric member called about extending a calling to my wife. When we married and she moved into the ward she had been a member of the Church for less than a year. She was immediately called to serve in the Young Women's presidency. She served there for a couple of years and was then released. A week or so later the bishopric member called indicating they would be extending a calling for her to serve in the nursery. I suggested they rethink that a bit and give her an opportunity to serve in a calling that would allow her to attend Relief Society on Sundays as she'd not really done so to that point, then a member for only a couple of years. I also noted I would support her if the calling was extended. It wasn't. She was then called to coordinate visiting teaching for the Relief Society and served there for several years. She later served in the Primary presidency and enjoyed doing so. On the other side of things, being in the bishopric (and as a bishop) I've seen how callings are decided upon, worked through, prayed about and extended and how they are sometimes declined. Two instances stand out to me: 1) We considered and prayed about a woman to serve as the Primary pianist and felt good to do so. When I extended the call she had kind of a baffled look on her face and said she didn't know how to play piano. I withdrew the call and wondered about our selection process. 2) I extended a calling for a woman to serve as Primary president. She accepted and was asked to consider who she would like to have as counselors. When I met with her the next week she indicated that her husband had accepted a new position for work that would take them across the country, leaving in just a couple of weeks. This was a new development that they'd not been aware of when I'd extended the calling the week previous. She seemed kind of embarrassed about the situation. I thanked her for her willingness to accept the call, withdrew the call and again wondered why things had played out as they had. I assume there was a purpose for both of those experiences either for me or the individuals who received the callings...but I'm not sure what it was.

There was a time when the football rivalry between BYU and the U of U was fun and light-hearted. When I was a student at Utah in the 1980s, that is how we approached it. I was shocked to discover that many BYU students, even back then, sincerely despised Utah and honestly wished evil upon its football team as well as the institution itself and especially its students. Charges of "we’re-God’s-chosen" attitudes abounded, though I never saw such from Utah students. Acquaintances at BYU confirmed that the bitter feelings were both sincere and widely felt. Max Hall was just the one to verbalize it. I avoid most rivalry nonsense now. Some BYU students, alumni, and supporters I count as dear, close friends, even family. I have been disappointed to find in my adult life that some BYU alums proudly wear a chip on their shoulder and actively denigrate Utah as an institution as well as its students and alumni, even at Church. A better man than I would take pity on such souls. For myself, I tend to avoid those who despise me. There is nothing ennobling, or fun, or enjoyable about "rivalry" interactions with BYU. BYU students, alumni, and faculty have seen to that. It’s all hatred and virtue-signaling, allegations of religious bigotry. Mockery is common; a favorite of many BYU students is denigrating the Ute Indian tribe by referring to Utah’s mascot as the “Yewts”. Har de, har har. Personally, I am all for Utah dropping BYU from any and all sports and other intermural activities forever. Winning streak? Losing streak? Who cares? If they want to proclaim their moral superiority, that's okay by me. Let them wallow in their own self-proclaimed righteousness. Just keep those I care about away from them. The point is there is nothing holy about it. (And for the record, I'm certainly not talking about Vort. I don’t know him personally so can’t speak intelligently about his behavior and attitude. I do enjoy reading his comments on these boards. I only want to point out the nastiness goes both ways, unfortunately.)

I did this a few times in years past - and am not a wealthy individual, just had some mutual funds that had appreciated nicely. It isn't hard and doesn't take a math major. The big advantage is by donating shares one can avoid the capital gains on those shares and associated tax (US-centric, consult your tax advisor for specifics). The Church has a Donations in Kind Office who is happy to work with you. Just call the general COB phone number and they can connect you with the correct folks. As a bishop one of the things I enjoyed was having kids hand me donation envelopes; some would shake my hand, some would give me a quick hug, some would hand it off at arm's length. As for adults, them handing me envelopes at least gave me the opportunity to shake their hand and say hello and thank you. That may be the only time in some period of time that I actually would speak to them. The on-line donations eliminate a lot of this, unfortunately. Even so, I like to use the on-line function myself. I had lunch last week with a friend who works in the Church's IT and operations department. On the topic of efficiency it was initially proposed that on-line donations could be set up as a repeatable event so the member could set it up once and be done with it. That suggestion was immediately and completely shot down with the rationale that each donation needed to be made intentionally and freely given.

A couple of fun experiences doing temple recommend interviews as a bishop: Our stake president, who was a member of my ward, needed to renew his recommend at the same time I needed to renew mine. So we sat down across from each other at my desk. I asked him the questions, he asked me the questions, I signed my recommend twice (member and bishopric) and his once (bishopric), turned the book around to him and he signed his recommend twice (member and stake presidency) and mine once (stake presidency). We shook hands and went on our way. One of my last weeks prior to being released, as we were getting ready for the day, my wife asked if I would do her renewal interview. I thought about it for a moment and suggested she visit with one of my counselors. Later at church she approached me and asked again that I do her renewal interview. I asked if she wouldn't be more comfortable meeting with one of my counselors. She said, "no" so we sat down in my office and did the interview. I didn't think much of it as it seemed to have been just another recommend interview. Later while sitting at dinner our son asked how her recommend interview had gone. She responded saying it had been one of the toughest recommend interviews she had ever had. I was totally surprised as it had seemed uneventful to me. She said I was very direct and businesslike in my asking of the questions. That's how I am so I didn't understand. She went on to explain that by being as serious as I am with the interview it comes across as intimidating. We ended the conversation with me wondering if everyone I'd ever interviewed had come away feeling that way.

Within the recent past a marriage for time, in the temple or not, using the verbiage in the Handbook, referenced covenants the parties were making before God and the witnesses. The last marriage I performed about 6 years ago used that terminology. In the Handbook today, the verbiage reverences "vows" rather than covenants but still acknowledges these vows are being made before God and witnesses. I don't know how recently that change was made. When my wife and I were married civilly, we did not have any less of a commitment to our relationship than when we were sealed a couple of months later. For us the end goal was the same. Our marriage felt no less serious than our sealing. The wedding license was not just a "piece of paper" and was not used to allow us to "shack-up". That's kind of a harsh description. From a practical point of view the wedding had a much greater impact on our lives than the sealing. From an eternal perspective, of course, not so much. I think this latest move is simply a step for the Church to get out of the marriage business completely. I see a day, not too distant, when bishops and stake presidents will no longer perform marriages of any kind. Couples will need to meet the legal requirements as defined by the government. The sealing with then be an ordinance for only those who live up to the standards required and will be a sacrament of the Church rather than a governmentally-recognized contract. A marriage license will no longer be needed, only a recommend for a living ordinance.

I will defer to your experience as I have precious little. What I can say is we had 18 year olds split out as separate heads of households, including my son when he turned 18, and I never asked that it be done. As such, I had assumed it occurred automatically. Perhaps I just had a rogue clerk who did it.......

This won't help Carborendum at all but this topic brought back fond memories. When I was bishop our elders quorum president did not speak English as his primary language. He carried a small notebook with him in which he would occasionally write. I asked him about it. He explained that whenever he heard a word he wasn't familiar with he would write the word in the notebook then work later on to learn it and use it in conversation. That became a challenge for me to see how frequently I could get him to write in the notebook. I asked a couple of years later if he still used the notebook. He said he did but didn't come across unfamiliar words very often anymore. He also laughed and said he never used it as frequently as when we were having ward councils. Mission accomplished. What was really funny was when other members of the council - native English speakers - stopped me to explain a word.

When they turn 18 they become a separate household and are noted as the head of the household. You effectively have a membership record for a non-member adult. If the parents move their records, it does not impact the now-adult child's record. Unless there are extenuating circumstances this would typically be addressed during a membership cleanup or audit.

I've started seeing memes, posts, etc. on social media about Halloween having been cancelled. Discussions have begun to identify work around strategies to this supposed tyranny. I'm confused. I've not heard anything that I'd consider official say anything at all about Halloween let alone saying it's been cancelled. I checked my city's web site where I see there are seasonal activities scheduled but will have masks, social distancing, etc. No indication about Halloween having been cancelled. Local stores carry all the goods one would expect at this time of year. It seems all systems go. What gives?

After receiving my endowment and prior to leaving on my mission I was invited by a friend to the Salt Lake Temple where we performed proxy baptisms and confirmations for individuals who had been excommunicated then passed away prior to rebaptism. As part of the confirmation there was also a restoration of priesthood and temple blessings performed. As such, the proxy had to have been endowed. I don't recall if there was mention of sealings, however. My impression was that the individuals were restored to the status of their ordinances prior to their excommunication. I'm afraid I don't know what the process was to get the names of the individuals ready for the proxy work. We showed up and worked for names provided to us by whomever was running the show. I also did not have this question come up while I was serving as bishop so never researched it. With the General Handbook of Instructions now open to all, perhaps there are details contained therein that could answer the questions you ask. My understanding also is that the excommunication of the father does nothing to impact the covenants and blessings from those covenants entered into by the spouse (assuming she remains true to her covenants) or the children born in the covenant. They are still born in the covenant regardless of what their parents do later in life. This ties to our second Article of Faith. As for the question of what happens in the hear after, I take comfort from my faith that our Heavenly Father will get it all worked as is appropriate. My capacity for understanding at this point makes it a useless exercise to try to figure out all the intricacies and variations that may result from our imperfect lives and decisions.

Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga Found this on Netflix, it's a relatively new film. It's the story of an Icelandic singing duo (probably or definitely not brother and sister) played by Will Ferrell and Rachel McAdams who end up representing Iceland for Eurovision, which we learned is a real thing and a very big deal in Europe. We only decided to watch it as we'd been to Iceland a couple of years ago and absolutely loved the place. We hoped to see some things we'd recognize and were not disappointed. It was surprisingly well done and features many former Eurovision competitors performing their music. I had goosebumps for the final performance. I find myself going back to watch bits and pieces of it. Note: Will Ferrell does his own singing but Rachel McAdams lip syncs to performances by Molly 'My Marianne' Sandén, whose voice is incredible.

This doesn't add anything to the conversation (apologies in advance) but many years ago in Sunday School the teacher started off the lesson by asking, "has anyone here ever seen an angel?" After a pause I raised my hand. This caught the instructor by surprise. After fumbling for a moment he asked when. I replied, "every morning when I roll over." I just ruined the morning for every other married man in the room......

When I was bishop I would frequently come home following an evening of interviews and Google things that I needed to better understand for which I probably wouldn't have searched otherwise. I thought it was kind of rude to do so during the interview. Were someone to examine my search history they would think I was a messed up guy.

SI has bigger issues than the COVID issue. I'm a 30+ year subscriber but have turned off auto-renewal and will allow my current subscription to expire. My concerns really began a year or so ago when they changed to a bi-weekly rather than weekly. They also seemed to have a lot of double issues so were basically running as a monthly. At the beginning of 2020 they announced the were officially going monthly. That was when I decided the magazine no longer provided the entertainment I desired. See ya. I suspect I am not alone and that their subscription rates have been nose diving since well before COVID. Aside: Several years ago they broke out their swimsuit issue to be a completely separate issue. Previously it had been one of their weekly sports issues beefed up with the swimsuits and additional advertising. When they split it off on its own I called SI to let them know I wasn't thrilled with paying for a fashion magazine. I was told that I could adjust my subscription to skip the swimsuit issue and extend my subscription by a week. So I did and haven't received the swimsuit issue since. At the time I was told they weren't allowed to tell me how many others followed that option. More recently, however, they run a footnote in their subscription information letting people know of the no-swimsuit-issue option.

When I served as bishop my calendar (almost) always went through the Ex. Sec. Even if someone approached me and asked about meeting I would generally tell them to talk with Bro. Ex. Sec. to get on my calendar. I say "almost" as there were times that I would add the person to my calendar myself and other times when we'd go sit down right then and chat. It was very situational but the default was to get on my calendar via the Ex. Sec. As for the comment above: Whenever an issue was brought to me my first question would always be, "who is the home/visiting teacher?" The Relief Society president, high priest group leader and elders quorum president learned very quickly to make sure they had their HT/VT assignment lists with them for ward council. Much easier now with the ministering assignments included in Member Tools and LCR. Even with the push to offload member issues from the bishop we should still start with asking who the ministering brother or sister is. Just as the bishop can't deal with everything, the EQ and RS presidents won't be able to either. That's the whole point of ministering assignments.

I'm cheering for Justin Verlander (Astros), Max Scherzer (Nats) and Anibal Sanchez (Nats) who are all former Detroit Tigers pitchers but couldn't quite bring the championship to Detroit.

Our Sabbath typically consists of attending church services and any other meetings our callings might entail. When we come home we sit together and go through the next week’s Come Follow Me lesson. A nap may take place. I will spend some time writing a letter via e-mail to my geographically dispersed family and read e-mailed letters they have sent. We may take a walk or bike ride along the nearby rail trail. We will definitely barbecue for dinner, occasionally hosting the missionaries serving in our ward. I will work on action items related to my calling if any are outstanding or prepare for an upcoming speaking assignment. Later in the evening we may watch a movie on Netflix or read and will finish the day off by Skyping with our son who is attending school several hours away. I will avoid shopping, attending sporting events, movies, etc. that would cause someone else to have to work on the Sabbath. E.g., I wouldn’t have any qualms filling my gas tank as I’m driving somewhere except that requires an attendant to be at work so I don't.

https://www.deseret.com/2019/10/2/20894166/church-women-policy-witnesses-lds-mormon-conference The Deseret news is reporting an announcement from the Church indicating that women can serve as witnesses at baptisms and temple sealings. Additionally, children who have been baptized can also serve as witnesses at baptisms. Youth with limited use recommends can act as witnesses for baptisms in the temple.

Handbook 2 14.4.4 says the opening and closing hymns are "...normally sung by the congregation." Exceptions occur. The same section also goes on to say, "The sacrament hymn is always sung by the congregation." Exceptions should not occur.

Agreed. My go to question is, "Tell us about a day in the life of a general authority. What kinds of projects are you working on? What specific assignments do you have?" When asked that question in an adult session of stake conference Elder Larry Wilson talked about an effort to bring clean water to remote villages across Asia. It was fascinating and exciting that the Church is involved in those kinds of efforts. As a member of the temple committee he visited our local temple. He asked how he could help...and ended up taking a couple of garbage bags out to the dumpster. Elder Anthony Perkins came to our ward one week. He attended our PEC and Ward Council meetings. He presided in sacrament meeting but did not speak other than sharing a brief testimony. We corralled him for a combined Young Women and Young Men meeting. In answer to my question, he talked about some of the day to day meetings he has, mentioned he'd had lunch with Pres. Eyering the previous Thursday then talked about the prayer assignments in General Conference, including specific time targets they are given. He also mentioned one of his sons had timed his prayer at a recent conference and texted him that he'd gone 25 seconds over. I like the question as the answer reminds folks that there is more to being a general authority than giving conference talks and reorganizing stake presidencies.

New Mexico - Albuquerque, 1981-1982. I was called for 24 months but served for 18 as missions for elders were shortened with the announcement coming on what became my hump day. My last Sunday in New Mexico was Christmas with my return home on Wednesday. My Christmas phone call home focused mostly on plans for New Year's Eve coming that next weekend. My son served in Nevada - Las Vegas, Spanish speaking. He was in the 3rd group of missionaries that attended the CCM in Mexico City (see photo) rather than the MTC in Provo.

*Time traveler arrives from the future Me: Did they really storm Area 51 in 2019? Time Traveler: You mean The Great Area 51 Massacre?