Seems harsh or is it normal?

[MaMeeshkaMow]

Ok, so here is the situation. My wife and I have been semi-active in the church. What I mean is we probably average 2-3 times a month going to all 3 meetings. The times we don't go is sometimes we feel so dang tired (both of us work with 2 kids under 2 years old so we sleep...bad excuse I know). Anyway, our temple recommends expired a year ago so we wanted to renew them. So we go to the bishop and ask what we need to do before we go back. He wants full attendance (which is understandable) but the kicker was he set a temple goal of going back in May/June of 2011. MY immediate reaction was it sounded harsh and a long way...I mean I heard of people not going back for a year because of fornication sins but 6 months for not being totally active...

Now, I don't want to complain about leaders. I'm not that person. He's a great guy. Is this a normal thing? IT made my wife cry a lot because she was looking forward to going back soon. IS this normal policy? Thanks!

[HiJolly]

One of the recommend Q's is: Do you attend your meetings regularly?

Your Bishop doesn't sound out of place to me.

HiJolly

[ryanh]

I have observed in my life what appears to be varying standards depending on the particular Bishop. I think of one in particular that likely would have had a response very similar to yours. And others that may not have been so lengthy in their expectations.

However, what may on the surface appear to be variability, may in fact be inspiration and design. I can theorize many ways that such action, which may seem harsh, can be a blessing in disguise. It could be a blessing, a personalized test, or even just a scrooge Bishop that is part of our clinical material provided for practicing forgiveness. Meekness and humility in such circumstances is what is in order.

If endured well now, “all these things” can be for our good and can “greatly enlarge the soul,” including an enlarged capacity for joy (D&C 122:7; D&C 121:42). Meek suffering often does the excavating necessary for that enlarging!

Apply the Atoning Blood of Christ

[Backroads]

Doesn't seem overly harsh, though I certainly sympathize with the suckiness of it.

Here are my personal thoughts, if I may: semi-active isn't nearly at the level of various moral/WoW sins. If someone tells me they're semi-active, I don't think anything of it, doesn't bother me in the least. However, with expired temple recommend, I can understand wanting to see a little more evidence of commitment. Not saying you aren't, but I agree with what has been said: it could be inspiration on his part, something you and your wife need.

Now if he said wait a year, I think that would be super harsh.

[MaMeeshkaMow]

Thanks guys. We've been more diligent in attending everything since the interview with the bishop. There are times when I think I might faint because of being so tired (our 1 month baby does the usual 3 hour gapper for feeding at night) but God seems to lift me up and gets me going. I think of the story of Joseph Smith getting tarred and feather but he still did his duty the next day. I love stories of tough commitment because it helps me put things in perspective. THen I think of my own bishop. He is my age, has 3 little kids and probably starts his Sundays at 7:00 or so and stays much past 4:00. Another example of how the natural man (I need sleep!!!) can delay spiritual progression. Thanks guys!

[rameumptom]

There is a minimal standard for a temple recommend. It is a privilege, not a right. We need to ensure members truly are ready to make and keep covenants in the temple, as it is so very important to do. If you struggle with attendance and other smaller issues, then you may not be ready to give full attention and devotion to temple worship.

Your bishop is right on track. The waiting period will give you reason to step up your game and prove, not to the bishop but to the Lord, that you are truly ready and desirous to serve in the Holy Temple of God.

[tubaloth]

I'm sure your idea was what? One month, two months? Either way I'm sure the bishop is trying to figure a test to show that you really are committed. Then again I think if you show things are going good by march and april he might allow you to get your temple recommend early.

[Kurt]

Half a year? Seriously? And your Bishop made your wife cry?

Ridiculous.

I think that is way too strict. Three months tops is where it should be, IMHO. You should mention this to your stake president and tell him you really wanted to go back to the temple soon. Half a year is too long and not a very reasonable time to wait. (Unless you had other problems you need to work on besides attendance).

I have always had an issue with how strict and unforgiving some people in this church can be. We go too hard on ourselves and each other. People are pushed away from our church and go inactive because goals are set too darn high. It makes me feel awful to see people told to be super perfect. NOBODY is perfect. Just as bad is the horrible shame we heap on ourselves over certain things.

~Kurt

[Guest Alana]

I suppose it might be harsh if you view this as a punishment. Is it possible the bishop did this to help you understand the blessings you sacrifice when you don't do what you're supposed to do? Did putting a 6 month wait on temple attendance make the temple seem even more important and bring to light what is asked of us to be worthy of it?

Plus, it seems that you really stepped up and are willing to get more active and perhaps will see more blessing aside from being able to go to the temple from that. Could it be that the 6 months wait was even an inspired decision from the Bishop, tailored to your particular need? I can see a lot of positive things coming out of this.

[pam]

Half a year? Seriously? And your Bishop made your wife cry?

Ridiculous.

I think that is way too strict. Three months tops is where it should be, IMHO. You should mention this to your stake president and tell him you really wanted to go back to the temple soon. Half a year is too long and not a very reasonable time to wait. (Unless you had other problems you need to work on besides attendance).

I have always had an issue with how strict and unforgiving some people in this church can be. We go too hard on ourselves and each other. People are pushed away from our church and go inactive because goals are set too darn high. It makes me feel awful to see people told to be super perfect. NOBODY is perfect. Just as bad is the horrible shame we heap on ourselves over certain things.

~Kurt

I've always had an issue with people who seem to criticize Bishops they do not know for the way they handle situations. I would like to think the Bishop received some inspiration based on the conversations to make his decision.

Edited December 24, 2010 by pam

[Guest mormonmusic]

I think 6 months is a bit long, but on the other hand, it IS a question about whether you attend your meetings regularly in the TR recommend interview questions. And it IS the call of the Bishop.

Also, I can't tell you how frustrating it is as a leader to have people who come once and a while and seem to be on their own schedule. You try to have meetings in priesthood or combined RS/Priesthood meetings about things that affect the Ward and the people who need to hear it aren't there. So you either those their involvement or you have to chase them down individually. I had a couple like that and their attitude is "The Church is here at my own convenience". It can be very demotivating to the Ward leaders when people waltz out of interviews with full recommends, altough I realize it's not the leader's call (other than the Bishop).

It IS a judgment call for the Bishop. It sounds like he's trying to motivate you a bit. I'd just do what he says, as coming to Church is pretty basic. Your thinking about the hours your Bishop is putting in is good -- as a former leader I had a FT job, PT job, was going to school part-time and young children at home, and I still was a leader, attended meetings and put in lots of time outside of meetings. Sometimes I pulled all-nighters to stay caught up. So, while I emphathisize with how it feels to be worn out from young children and life in general, I find it hard to be sympathetic having walked the weary road myself.

Edited December 25, 2010 by mormonmusic

[Carl62]

I have always had an issue with how strict and unforgiving some people in this church can be. We go too hard on ourselves and each other. People are pushed away from our church and go inactive because goals are set too darn high. It makes me feel awful to see people told to be super perfect. NOBODY is perfect. Just as bad is the horrible shame we heap on ourselves over certain things.

~Kurt

Excellent post Kurt! You hit the nail right on the head!!

[NeuroTypical]

As we respond in this thread, let's keep a few things clear in our minds.

* We're not there.

* We're only getting half the story.

* We are not this couple.

* We do not have stewardship over this couple.

* We do not have access to inspiration about what to do here.

* Every situation is different. Bishops are given general guidelines and access to the spirit, and they apply both to the best of their ability in order to help people.

* It's not like there's been some public censure here, or probation involving not taking the sacrament or something. A couple who hasn't been to the temple in a year and has struggled with (very valid IMO) issues to remain active, is being given a roadmap of several months back to temple attendance. It's not the end of the world, people.

LM

[mnn727]

Funny thing is in Bishopric meeting we discussed active, partially active and inactive and what defines them. I was suprised that my standard was much tougher than the Bishop or his counselors (I'm the Exec Sec) They defined active as being there 75% of the time, partially active as being there 25% of the time and inactive as never or only a couple times a year of being there.

I can't tell you if that was too tough or not - thats between you and the Bishop, I do know that my Stake President has said his goal is to have people attend the Temple so it may not have been as long in my Stake.

Edited December 24, 2010 by mnn727

[HiJolly]

Maybe the Church should define the terms (active, etc) in the CHI. Or, have they? O.o

HiJolly

[mnn727]

Maybe the Church should define the terms (active, etc) in the CHI. Or, have they? O.o

HiJolly

Nope, we looked.

[rameumptom]

Kurt, Carl, et al

The temple is not just a Disney tourist spot, where you drive up, buy a ticket, and then they cater to your every need.

The Church is for service to others; for giving and not getting. We attend the temple to prepare for perfection. If we are not meeting the minimal requirement for the temple, then we are heaping coals of eternal condemnation upon ourselves. The bishop who asks a person to attend faithfully for 6 months is doing his job: keeping sacred things sacred and set apart for those willing to make the sacrifice necessary to serve.

The story of the 10 Virgins tells us that although all are virgins, only 5 are willing to ensure they are fully prepared. If we start second guessing bishops and church leaders on such issues as worthiness, then we are not being humble nor willing to serve God the way God wants to be served. Jesus told the rich young man to sell all that he had and give the money to the poor, then follow Jesus. Many people who are good but not truly dedicated, sadly walk away from Jesus, when they are asked to sacrifice and do the Lord's command.

We either are serving God fully or we are not. The temple is for preparing terrestrial people to be celestial. If a person does not keep the Sabbath holy or pay tithes or live the Word of Wisdom, he is not living a terrestrial law. Telestial people should not go into the temple, as they desecrate it by their unwillingness to turn their lives over to God. They need to repent or accept the fact that they will not enter into the Celestial Kingdom and temple. Humility is what is needed here, not proud people attempting to steady the ark.

[IAmTheWork]

I have always had an issue with how strict and unforgiving some people in this church can be. We go too hard on ourselves and each other. People are pushed away from our church and go inactive because goals are set too darn high. It makes me feel awful to see people told to be super perfect. NOBODY is perfect. Just as bad is the horrible shame we heap on ourselves over certain things.

I have to agree with you Kurt, at least to say that that's how I felt years ago when I left the church. Not so much now, as I'm older and more experienced, and would stand my own ground.

It's not so much an LDS church problem I'd say, more just a natural human sub-cultural issue of power and control between group members. Many people don't know about, or ignore, recognised psychological knowledge of human interactions. And bishops are not generally trained in anything along those lines either, poor guys!

Spiritual inspiration is wonderful when it flows and is perceived easily, but when not then the human side is all we have to fall back on. But then learning from a dimly lit human perspective is why we're here, eh?