Temple Recommend Condundrum


Guest mormonmusic
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't think I have any home teachers. If I have, I have never seen them. With no priesthood in our home I would really appreciate them sometimes but I think they just have assignments to visit less active brethren.

That is really sad. The home teachng isn't being done for 'the administration' it should be done for the Lord.

I relate it to the covenant in the temple where we promise to do our all to build up the kingdom of God on the earth. Are we not asked in the interview if we are keeping our covenants?

Willow: I wanted to say something about home teaching – especially home teaching someone like you. I love home teaching. I believe home teaching is one of the most inspired opportunities among the saints. I would love to home teach someone like you.

Some things I love about home teaching:

. I love blessing someone’s home and family through the priesthood. I am more grateful to be entrusted with this than most anything.

. I love being called in the middle of the night to come give someone a blessing.

. I love seeing the families I home teach at church. Especially the youth and children.

. I love it when I am ridding my bicycle and I see someone I home teach (especially youth) to waive at them and hear them say to their friends, “Oh that just my home teacher.”

. I love it when someone I home teach comes to me and says, “Can I ask you a question?”

. I love it when someone I home teach recognizes me in public and says, “Hi brother M_____”

. I love running into someone I use to home teach.

I would add that I am not a 100% always there each month. Sometimes my travels take me away and schedules just do not mesh.

What I do not like about home teaching.

. Families thinking I came just to give them a message or expecting a spiritual message every time I show up.

. Priesthood leaders that think it is up to the home teacher to discover any problems the family is having.

. Asking if there are any problems

. Families that do not like their home teacher or are too busy to be bothered with a friendly visit from their neighbor.

One last note: I believe we are asked to home teach and perform other callings mainly because we are too lazy to do much of anything unless we are asked. Few would even think about visiting some member neighbor unless we are pushed into it with a calling.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What if this guy you're talking about in the very first post is a total slacker in all of his callings and meeting attendance BUT is a Zealot for genealogy?

What if this guy's passion and driving force is family history and not only is he passionate about it..he's GOOD at it too. Less any grievous sins if he is only "guilty" of lack of attendance or self initiative in other callings wouldnt it be a good thing to let this guy lose to do work for the dead? (and I mean endowments because I know baptism by proxy doesnt require a recommend.

Not a deciding factor, but perhaps a heavily weighed one at least? I mean sure none of his home teaching is getting done but everyone in the Sampsonite, Bush, and Brown family lines will have their work done! ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the person in question has some hidden issue about talking to people like social anxiety disorder or some other such medical problem? What if he is undiagnosed or chooses not to share those details with the rank and file of the ward.

Personally, I think it is wrong to "measure" someones worthiness based solely upon what they do or don't do. I don't think God judges this way. I don't think he leads spiritually tuned bishops to lead this way either.

Once not long ago, I went for my temple recommend interview. I discussed with the bishop how going to church would not be happening for a while. The bishop understood my situation and could see the wisdom of the spirit in the decision. During my interview with the SP, we discussed the issue. He objected at first and then after the spirit spoke he simply encouraged me to at least take the sacrament every week.

We can't legislate the gospel. The church is only a tool to help us get closer to God. We can't forget that each one of us has individual curriculums and challenges. We must allow each person to be evaluated individually according to their desires. To do anything less would be turning us all into a bunch of robotic human doings.

I am glad the TR questions are not a check off list. They need to be flexible. I am grateful they are flexible. We can invite. We can help people grow in commitment and capacity. But we should never force. There must be breathing room and freedom to choose. Let's remember which side we are rooting for here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

If I decide he can't have a TR....the Stake President will be on my side. Stake president generally does not knwo who has a TR or who doesn't unless I tell him or he looks at the list of memebrs holding a TR. The Stake President says that I as the Bishop have the final say in what goes on in Ward.

I would want to review with this person after a month or so...if no improvement, I would still be hesitant to issue a Temple Recommend.

Finally, someone with some backbone!!!! As a priesthood leader constantly beat up over home teaching, to know the Bishop was behind the program like this would've done much for my motivation and would've eased my frustration substantially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

What if the person in question has some hidden issue about talking to people like social anxiety disorder or some other such medical problem? What if he is undiagnosed or chooses not to share those details with the rank and file of the ward.

I said in an earlier preamble that there were no known health or anxiety issues that this brother shared. He seems well enough to attend social activities, come to Church, and attend events related to his daughter. He was capable of giving someone a blessing and finding a companion when needed once. I wrote this to lay bare this kind of person -- someone who has the emotional and physical capabilities to do home teaching, but just doesn't do it out of laziness, dislike for it, or rebellion against priesthood leaders. No other reason. As I said, lots and lots of interviews were held and everyone bent over backwards to make it easy for this brother and he just doesn't bother.

Personally, I think it is wrong to "measure" someones worthiness based solely upon what they do or don't do. I don't think God judges this way. I don't think he leads spiritualy tuned bishops to lead this way either.

They have no compunctions about really raking priesthood leaders and the quorums over the coals if home teaching is low; as I said earlier, I saw it last week. There definitely IS judging going on the neighbourhood of home teaching by the people above the Ward level.

Once not long ago, I went for my temple recommend interview. I discussed with the bishop how going to church would not be happening for a while. The bishop understood my situation and could see the wisdom of the spirit in the decision. During my interview with the SP, we discussed the issue. He objected at first and then after the spirit spoke he simply encouraged me to at least take the sacrament every week.

When there are extenuating circumstances, there is always room for exceptions, but in this case, I saw none -- only decades of patience with this brother -- coupled with no firm action from anyone on the temple recommend front.

We can't legislate the gospel. The church is only a tool to help us get closer to God. We can't forget that each one of us has individual curriculums and challenges. We must allow each person to be evaluated individually according to their desires. To do anything less would be turning us all into a bunch of robotic human doings.

To some extent, we already do legislate the gospel -- the fact that there are hard rules for who and who cannot go to the temple is a case in point -- no tithing, no temple recommend. If you smoke, drink, or break the law of Chastity -- no temple recommend.

I think Bishops and Stake leaders are easier on people in private about those things than they are about home teaching to priesthood brethren, as well as their leaders.

I am glad the TR questions are not a check off list. They need to be flexible. I am grateful they are flexible. We can invite. We can help people grow in commitment and capacity. But we should never force. There must be breathing room and freedom to choose. Let's remember which side we are rooting for here.

Then if brethren have freedom to choose, there should NOT be regular bearing down on them about home teaching; they should be allowed to do it or not without chastisement. And priesthood leaders who try their best should not be held accountable when their brethren refuse to do something so simple.

I think it might be hard for people who haven't had to administer home or visiting teaching to perhaps understand how important it is to the people above.

For me, what disturbs me the most is how there's this firm and constant prodding about home teaching by people above the priesthood leaders, as if we actually have control over whether brethren do their home teaching. We don't -- we can fill them with the Spirt, lead, administer, and even try to work along side them, but if they don't respond, there is nothing we can do.

Now, Bishops and Stake Presidents can revoke temple recommends after all reasonable efforts of persuasion and patience have failed, but the leaders above seem unwilling to do this. There's a willingness to drag down the priesthood leaders who are doing their best when home teaching is low, but no willingness to set firm expectations to the rank and file brethren through revocation of recommends. Never seen it in any Ward I've been in, priesthood leader or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the original question, would I give him a temple recommend? If he answers all the interview questions properly, yes, I would.

Case in point, our whole priesthood body in our Ward was chastised sternly by the Stake last Sunday for not doing home teaching, along with other things like not reading scriptures, suggestions that brethren were probably looking at "inappropriate pictures" (I won't say the "p" word), or going to the temple. Words like -- "Did you do your home teaching last month???". It was very terse and harsh and said with strong impatience.

In the meeting, there was an exercise where we simulated a court case where one side of the room came out with the excuses for not doing home teaching, and the other side of the room had to rebut their arguments. The side with the excuses was referred to as "the slackers" by a member of our Stake Presidency.

Some meeting, I would have been tempted to walk out. Berating the men and making them feel guilty and ashamed for not doing their home teaching does not motivate. As Elders Quorum President I've given many lessons on Home Teaching, done PPIs, even had guys say straight to my face that they're going to do it, and then don't. I'm convinced there are three kinds of home teachers, those who do it, those who do it sometimes, and those who never do it. Most fall into the first and third categories and rarely change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said in an earlier preamble that there were no known health or anxiety issues that this brother shared. He seems well enough to attend social activities, come to Church, and attend events related to his daughter. He was capable of giving someone a blessing and finding a companion when needed once. I wrote this to lay bare this kind of person -- someone who has the emotional and physical capabilities to do home teaching, but just doesn't do it out of laziness, dislike for it, or rebellion against priesthood leaders. No other reason. As I said, lots and lots of interviews were held and everyone bent over backwards to make it easy for this brother and he just doesn't bother.

They have no compunctions about really raking priesthood leaders and the quorums over the coals if home teaching is low; as I said earlier, I saw it last week. There definitely IS judging going on the neighbourhood of home teaching by the people above the Ward level.

When there are extenuating circumstances, there is always room for exceptions, but in this case, I saw none -- only decades of patience with this brother -- coupled with no firm action from anyone on the temple recommend front.

To some extent, we already do legislate the gospel -- the fact that there are hard rules for who and who cannot go to the temple is a case in point -- no tithing, no temple recommend. If you smoke, drink, or break the law of Chastity -- no temple recommend.

I think Bishops and Stake leaders are easier on people in private about those things than they are about home teaching to priesthood brethren, as well as their leaders.

Then if brethren have freedom to choose, there should NOT be regular bearing down on them about home teaching; they should be allowed to do it or not without chastisement. And priesthood leaders who try their best should not be held accountable when their brethren refuse to do something so simple.

I think it might be hard for people who haven't had to administer home or visiting teaching to perhaps understand how important it is to the people above.

For me, what disturbs me the most is how there's this firm and constant prodding about home teaching by people above the priesthood leaders, as if we actually have control over whether brethren do their home teaching. We don't -- we can fill them with the Spirt, lead, administer, and even try to work along side them, but if they don't respond, there is nothing we can do.

Now, Bishops and Stake Presidents can revoke temple recommends after all reasonable efforts of persuasion and patience have failed, but the leaders above seem unwilling to do this. There's a willingness to drag down the priesthood leaders who are doing their best when home teaching is low, but no willingness to set firm expectations to the rank and file brethren through revocation of recommends. Never seen it in any Ward I've been in, priesthood leader or not.

So are you just mad that the brethren are bearing down on you?

Just forgive the dude and hand the rest to God. There are hidden things in our hearts no one can judge except for God. Give yourself a break by not carrying the burden of judgement.

You are right. There is nothing you can do ......except continue on in love and patience and respect and long suffering and meekness.........

And as far as I can tell the standards for HTing are pretty firm already. I see nothing good coming from revoking recommends to reinforce the message. Even if the leaders get exasperated with the flock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

So are you just mad that the brethren are bearing down on you?

Not angry -- but frustrated, and weary of the whole issue, and seeking a more effective solution. For three years we worked really hard to make the program work. Nothing worked or was acceptable to the leaders above us. I eventually burnt out on the effort. I was so thankful to be out of it when they bore down on a new set of leaders -- except far worse than I ever experienced.

Just forgive the dude and hand the rest to God. There are hidden things in our hearts no one can judge except for God. Give yourself a break by not carrying the burden of judgement.

This particular brother -- I don't think there's a grudge here, nor is there any burdensome feelings toward him. Every Ward has them; he's an archetype. If you check out some of the threads I started on home teaching, you'll see other brethren who frequent this site that have similar attitudes and refuse to do it.

I think my feelings are more with the program than anything else. Prompted by the tongue lashing I saw everyone receive last Sunday. I went to Church to be uplifted and inspired, had a good Sunday School lesson teaching new members about the beauty of the gospel, and then left Priesthood demotivated given the harsh tones and weariness of the whole home teaching issue. By the way, I do my hometeaching every month.

Next Sunday I'm hiding out in Primary as a substitute teacher instead of hearing the aftermath from local leaders.

You are right. There is nothing you can do ......except continue on in love and patience and respect and long suffering and meekness.........

Actually, I was able to deal with it -- I dealt with this partly by simply getting out the priesthood leadership calling for a while.

I'd hit my limit and it's been so much better being a Gospel Essentials teacher -- now THERE is real impact for effort expended. I taught the Law of Justice and Mercy last week and it was new to most of the people in the room, including some newer members. The Spirit's been backing me up and it's been marvelous.

And as far as I can tell the standards for HTing are pretty firm already. I see nothing good coming from revoking recommends to reinforce the message. Even if the leaders get exasperated with the flock.

I can't agree with that one. The standards are loose. There's no firm statement of what a home teaching is that is "enforced" generally throughout the Church. People count it as many different ways as you can imagine -- from a gold standard visit in the home, including a message, to a "best efforts" measure if the home teacher tried but couldn't get an appointment, to counting letters to people who refuse home teachers. People can refuse to do it for decades and then sit next to you in the temple, cheapening the experience, in my view. The program gets more attention than any other program I'm aware of, yet there are no consequences for non-compliance.

Personally, I like Palerider's resolution to this problem -- talk to the reluctant brethren in their temple recommend interview and follow up in a month. If they don't do it, then they aren't supporting their local leaders and need to repent. Let the Spirit guide at that point, but don't be afraid to be firm with them and pull the recommend.

Edited by mormonmusic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

Programs over people. Nothing good comes when this becomes our goal.

Well, then you must be with me on questioning the effectiveness of the priesthood rip-session I described above. The people that put out when it comes to hometeaching (like me) were forgotten and painted with the same brush.

Also, something to think about -- if a person claims to be following Jesus, to walk in his shoes, to sustain his leaders, believe the prophet, and then refuses to do a basic responsiblity of serving his fellow men, the fatherless, the widows, etcetera -- doesn't that make the program and the people BOTH important? Is it good for the spirit of man ("the person") to go through life refusing to get behind a program that breeds selflessness?

I don't think so -- programs have the ultimate goal of enobling the Spirit when properly implemented. What I've described here shows how NOT to motivate people to do home teaching.

They reproved with sharpness, and I seriously question whether there'll be any increase in love shown afterwards. One reason I hope it's a long time before I have to administer this program again. Happy just to be a home teacher for the next few years.

I'm not sure of your visiting teaching administration experience Miss Halfway, but I believe that if you were responsible for it for several years, tried everything possible to make the program work, and found people just didn't care (while you get chastised and smothered by the Stake for not getting the results they are seeking), you might look at it differently....

Edited by mormonmusic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most problems with home teaching can be chalked up to undue emphasis on "numbers", by both leaders and home teachers. Despite the fact that our instruction manuals have cautioned us against it for as long as I can remember, almost every effort with either Missionary work or Home Teaching amounts to nothing short of quotas. I think if we look at it honestly, it is that and the pressure that comes with it that encourages "burn out" and lack of motivation. Not to say that individuals don't legitimately have a need to step up and be valiant in some cases, but that is my assessment.

I'm normally the one in leadership meetings who gets turned off by the imposition of quotas in the guise of "goals", and I usually make that known. But then I drop it, since it falls on deaf ears, and just do the things that I know are effective when it comes to my home teaching efforts. I discuss our families with my companion, and we prayerfully seek the guidance of the Spirit as we minister to our families. We do what we can to meet their needs and report our results honestly. I try not to worry about anything else to tell you the truth.

I love being a home teacher, and I love the way I feel when I am anxiously engaged in it for the right reasons. I feel exactly like I did when I was a missionary. To tell you the truth, I don't want any other calling. Give me ten families to home teach and nothing else, and I will be as happy as a lark. Well, I would love to be a young missionary again in Finland, so if God is granting wishes that is what I wish too.

Elder Harold B. Lee taught, “Missionary work is but home teaching to those who are not now members of the Church, and home teaching is nothing more or less than missionary work to Church members.” (Improvement Era, Dec. 1964, p. 1078.)

And for those who think that your authority to preach the gospel lasts only two years, if you are fortunate enough to have been able to serve a mission, I offer my favorite quote currently, by Elder Bednar -

All of us who have received the holy priesthood bear the sacred obligation to bless the nations and families of the earth by proclaiming the gospel and inviting all to receive by proper authority the ordinances of salvation. Many of us have served as full-time missionaries, some of us presently are serving as full-time missionaries, and all of us now are serving and will continue to serve as lifelong missionaries. We are missionaries every day in our families, in our schools, in our places of employment, and in our communities. Regardless of our age, experience, or station in life, we are all missionaries.

Proclaiming the gospel is not an activity in which we periodically and temporarily engage. And our labors as missionaries certainly are not confined to the short period of time devoted to full-time missionary service in our youth or in our mature years. Rather, the obligation to proclaim the restored gospel of Jesus Christ is inherent in the oath and covenant of the priesthood into which we enter. Missionary work essentially is a priesthood responsibility, and all of us who hold the priesthood are the Lord’s authorized servants on the earth and are missionaries at all times and in all places—and we always will be. Our very identity as holders of the priesthood and the seed of Abraham is in large measure defined by the responsibility to proclaim the gospel. (LDS.org - Ensign Article - Becoming a Missionary)

We can fulfill our priesthood responsibilities by being good home teachers. I can't tell you how many wonderful people you can find for the missionaries to teach, even, through your own personal ministry as a home teacher. They are there, and we can help hunt and gather them unto Christ.

You can teach too!! The new converts must be qualified for baptism by those who work under the direction of the Mission President, who holds the keys to convert baptisms, but we hold the priesthood and have the gift of the Holy Ghost, and "are the Lord’s authorized servants on the earth and are missionaries at all times and in all places—and we always will be." Long before our friends begin to seriously prepare for baptism, which is when the missionaries must ensure they are qualified for it, we are engaged in teaching the restored gospel of Jesus Christ by both word and deed; or we should be. This doesn't mean we must have formal lessons, but that we love, serve, teach, and invite our friends and neighbors to receive the ordinances and covenants of salvation, and to live them. In other words, we simply live the gospel.

That's what home teaching is too. It is simply living the principles of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

Regards,

Vanhin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you are the gospel essentials teacher and the HTing numbers aren't even your responsibility yet you are laboring over this man and how he "cheapens the experience" for you?

I don't have words. I simply don't have words. Other than to say that we all need the tender mercies of the Savior cause I am not sure we can find them in the church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...Perhaps, in our exetolling our brethren and sisters to do their X, we could put it thusly...

'Our leaders have asked us to support them and improve our X. So, the ward leadership has put together a plan to achieve it by Y. We need and ask your support, as promised in your commitment to Heavenly Father and in the Temple Recommend interviews. Please help us achieve the goals of our Heavenly Father, as provided by the leadership of the church.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if perhaps you're letting the actions (or non-actions) of some people bog you down in your relationship with the Savior? To let someone 'cheapen' your temple experience because you know they don't do their home teaching the way you think they should means you are giving them control over you. As a wise person once said, 'Let it go, man'. You can only do what you can do.

I have issues with other members of my ward, and I know things about them that they probably wish I didn't know, but when I see them in the temple all I can do is treat them as the Lord would have me do. If I hold grudges, especially in the House of The Lord, then my heart is not in the right place. It doesn't matter if the other guy lied to get his recommend, or thinks he is more worthy than I think he is, he will be the one to answer for it, not me. All I'm concerned about in the temple is getting myself right with God, Jesus, my wife, and my family. The other stuff is just that, stuff. We're all sinners in the eyes of the Lord, some of us just have more to work on than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ummmm...... yes it does.

Ummmm .... NO it doesnt. I did baptisms for the dead when I was 14. Oh wait you're being technical... yes I did have to be "recommended" by my bishop to go into the baptismal room. But I was speaking of the "real" grown up version of the recommend. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmm .... NO it doesnt. I did baptisms for the dead when I was 14. Oh wait you're being technical... yes I did have to be "recommended" by my bishop to go into the baptismal room. But I was speaking of the "real" grown up version of the recommend. ^_^

it is a real recommend and you do have to be worthy, not just any baptized member can go do proxy baptisms. typically (as i've seen it done) when a youth group is going to the temple there is one "mass" recommend... where the bishop interviews all the youth and puts all their names on one sheet of paper. then each kid goes through the recommend desk with the temple worker and the bishop standing there saying "yup, this is .... and there is their name"

however, if a youth wants to go at another time (or an adult who is not endowed yet) they go to the bishop and get an interview. they, if found worthy, get a limited use recommend. it looks a bit different from the endowed members recommends but it is a valid recommend, good for 1 yr from the date given and should be kept in a safe place (just as one would do with an endowed members recommend). it should be taken as seriously as "real grown up" recommend. treating it as less than that will encourage the youth (and others) to not take entering the lords house to do baptisms as a serious issue. going to the temple for whatever reason should always be seen as something to be done worthily and with respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see an issue. I would give him the recommend as long as I felt he was sincere in his answers. All people are at different levels in their capability and understanding and we are unable to fully understand at the exact place they are. I'm sure there is much room for improvement but that includes everyone regardless of how "rightgeous" we may think someone is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Bishop, I would follow the guidelines in the temple recommend book. If the person can honestly answer the questions correctly, then I'd give him the recommend. Afterwards, I would encourage the person to step up a little in his dedication and service to the Church and others.

The questions ensure the minimal standard for entering the temple. We should not go around the standard questions to add more requirements to entrance. For all we know that same individual could be attending the temple frequently and performing many hours of salvation for the dead in the temple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow I feel your pain, my ward is 53% in active and we all have families that are inactive, nothing we do has been successful. I can tell you that you don't have to answer the temple interview question with a yes, And still get a recommend I answer I try to some of the questions and have always gotten a recommend. Most bishops let you judge yourself and rarely refuse a recommend for sins of omission. I wouldn't want to go to the temple unworthily personally, and heap more sin upon my head if I was one of these guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a bit of a problem with 'hypothetical' questions like this. It invites too many opportunities to lose the spirit.

For instance...after addressing this issue, one could then turn around and begin questioning how 'effective' his/her own bishop/stake president is at fulfilling his calling.

One could also then justify judging others in their ward as to how 'worthy' they are to hold a TR.

One could also justify not doing their home/visiting teaching because it's not specifically mentioned in the TR interview.

In short, we are tempting ourselves with justifying a great deal of pride.

My answer to the hypothetical question (that turns out not to be hypothetical at all) would be this; "When I'm the bishop and I have to face that situation, I hope the Lord tells me what to do, because I don't know the right answer."

Further, it's none of my business who else has a TR. My business is to make sure I'm worthy to obtain and hold one regularly. That worthiness is between myself, the bishop, the stake president, and the Lord...and frankly, everyone else can go pound sand if they feel they have a right to judge me and/or my worthiness.

On my mission, I was disturbed to find that a few of my fellow missionaries had no problem attending the temple without shaving. I know it's never laid out that you ought to...but it's the temple...the most sacred place on the earth, right? Well I knew the elders in question were very good, very spiritual, and I had no desire to look down on them.

All the same, it was tough. We cannot, we dare not, begin going through life assuming the Savior's role as judge of mankind. We must look to our own course of life and make sure we're doing all we can for ourselves and our families when it comes to worthiness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share