Expiration Dates and Temple Rec Interviews

[Misshalfway]

Am I correct that if ones recommend has expired, they must be interviewed by the bishop AND the stake president?

And if so, then how long would the recommend need to be expired for this to happen? A day? A month? Six months? I just want to be clear on this.

Also, something is happening in my stake that is really bothering me and its coming from the SP. In an effort to encourage folks to keep their recommends current, he often teaches that those who let it lapse even for a day will not be allowed into heaven. He often uses the parabel of the virgins and the lamp to illustrate the point by stating that the oil is symbolic of having a current recommend. The "bride groom will not let you into the wedding" if you don't have your recommend. In my TR interview recently, he said that the first question I'll be asked on the other side is whether or not the date on my card was current when I died. When asked about the state of my heart at my death, he said that it would be irrelavent if I didn't have a current card and that Jesus will say "I know you not". I've been hearing the stump speech for about 2 yrs now.

This bug anyone else like it bugs me?

Edited August 1, 2012 by Misshalfway

[MarginOfError]

Am I correct that if ones recommend has expired, they must be interviewed by the bishop AND the stake president?

And if so, then how long would the recommend need to be expired for this to happen? A day? A month? Six months? I just want to be clear on this.

To renew a recommend, you must be interviewed by both the bishop and stake president. The recommend does not need to be expired for a renewal. You could theoretically get it renewed every month, day or years.

Also, something is happening in my stake that is really bothering me and its coming from the SP. In an effort to encourage folks to keep their recommends current, he often teaches that those who let it lapse even for a day will not be allowed into heaven. He often uses the parabel of the virgins and the lamp to illustrate the point by stating that the oil is symbolic of having a current recommend. The "bride groom will not let you into the wedding" if you don't have your recommend. In my TR interview recently, he said that the first question I'll be asked on the other side is whether or not the date on my card was current when I died. When asked about the state of my heart at my death, he said that it would be irrelavent if I didn't have a current card and that Jesus will say "I know you not". I've been hearing the stump speech for about 2 yrs now.

This bug anyone else like it bugs me?

This is preposterous and I would object pretty strongly to it. If you're not comfortable telling him so, I'd recommend passing it up the chain to an Area Authority. Such nonsense ought not to be allowed.

[skalenfehl]

Also, something is happening in my stake that is really bothering me and its coming from the SP. In an effort to encourage folks to keep their recommends current, he often teaches that those who let it lapse even for a day will not be allowed into heaven. He often uses the parabel of the virgins and the lamp to illustrate the point by stating that the oil is symbolic of having a current recommend. The "bride groom will not let you into the wedding" if you don't have your recommend. In my TR interview recently, he said that the first question I'll be asked on the other side is whether or not the date on my card was current when I died. When asked about the state of my heart at my death, he said that it would be irrelavent if I didn't have a current card and that Jesus will say "I know you not". I've been hearing the stump speech for about 2 yrs now.

This bug anyone else like it bugs me?

The philosophies of a man mingled with scripture.

[applepansy]

Also, something is happening in my stake that is really bothering me and its coming from the SP. In an effort to encourage folks to keep their recommends current, he often teaches that those who let it lapse even for a day will not be allowed into heaven. He often uses the parabel of the virgins and the lamp to illustrate the point by stating that the oil is symbolic of having a current recommend. The "bride groom will not let you into the wedding" if you don't have your recommend. In my TR interview recently, he said that the first question I'll be asked on the other side is whether or not the date on my card was current when I died. When asked about the state of my heart at my death, he said that it would be irrelavent if I didn't have a current card and that Jesus will say "I know you not". I've been hearing the stump speech for about 2 yrs now.

This bug anyone else like it bugs me?

I'd be tempted to let the area Seventy know. I would definitely talk to my Bishop about this false teaching.

[estradling75]

I'm going to take the opposite position.. The Stake President is in the position to teach, judge, give the will of god and otherwise meet the needs of the Stake. Not only that, he is required to do so with all diligence.

He clearly sees a problem and is working with all diligence to counter it... Can you be sure that is not exactly what the Holy Spirit is prompting him to do? He has all the keys and authority to do so. He can make judgements and prophesies for the members of his stake.

Now lets take the judgement of the heart vs holding a recommend at judgement. It is by our actions that the desires of our heart is made known (Speaking generally... There are exceptions were one can't, but in most cases we are responsible to translate our desires into action)

If one is worthy, maintaining a current temple recommend is easy. If one lets it expire un-renewed, what does that say about the desires of ones heart, to one who has the keys to Judge? I am not in such a position, but I know for me it would mean I let the things of the world, and possibly even lesser things of the Church distract me from maintaining my ability to go into one of the most sacred places on earth. If I were to die in that state why would I expect to be able to go into the most sacred places in the heavens?

Clearly there can be exceptions were one can't re-new... I am not talking about those... I am talking about the case were I fail to make happen because it wasn't important enough to me (either to remember or to get off my lazy butt to do it). If I were in such a state I would not be surprise to find the Stake President to be spot on.

[skalenfehl]

My intention is not to be argumentative so rather than disputing, I will simply form a question or questions.

Does allowing my temple recommend to lapse automatically render me unworthy? Does it invalidate all my previous works and nullify my righteous desires? On the other hand, if I am a valiant servant of the Lord and faithful member of His church, would I procrastinate in renewing my temple recommend? Lastly, does becoming unable to enter the temple to do work for the dead really dam(n) me from entering into the Celestial Kingdom?

In conclusion, I hardly believe that this stake president is qualified to receive revelation for his stake, where such doctrines are not required to apply to the countless remaining stakes, branches and wards of the church the world over. Such a revelation would be received much, much higher up the line of authority.

[estradling75]

You can quibble of the Stake Presidents Doctrinal accuracy all you wish, but don't miss the main point.

The Local priesthood leader is calling those that within his authority to repent and maintain their temple privileges... Which is totally in line with gospel and doctrine as presented by the prophets. There might be some issues in how he is trying to get that message through to the people. But I would highly advise anyone in this or similar situation to spend more time applying the message and less time trying to shoot the messenger over human weaknesses or other failings.

[rameumptom]

Temple recommends are valid for 2 years, after which both bishop and stake president interview the person again. You do not have to wait for it to expire to renew it.

I think there may be reasons for a temple recommend to expire. However, laziness in our spiritual duties is a sign that we are being a foolish virgin. While your stake president's statement is not doctrinal, we should not ignore it or think he's completely wrong in his assessment. BTW, when your stake president says "heaven" he obviously means exaltation. Baptism is all that is necessary for the celestial kingdom, and there's no renewal required for it (although the Sacrament does allow us to renew).

Much of this idea comes from many LDS still holding too tightly to the old understanding of salvation that was taught in the early to mid 1900s. There was a belief we had to earn salvation. Fortunately, the Church since Pres Benson has been moving back to studying and understanding the teachings of the Book of Mormon, which gives us a better understanding of salvation, exaltation, grace, atonement, justification and sanctification.

We aren't exalted based on whether we have a current temple recommend, but based on the level of sanctification we've received. Yes, having a temple recommend allows us to attend the temple, which is instrumental in our sanctification process. But being one day late in getting one's recommend renewed probably will not risk one's exaltation.

[applepansy]

You can quibble of the Stake Presidents Doctrinal accuracy all you wish, but don't miss the main point.

The Local priesthood leader is calling those that within his authority to repent and maintain their temple privileges... Which is totally in line with gospel and doctrine as presented by the prophets. There might be some issues in how he is trying to get that message through to the people. But I would highly advise anyone in this or similar situation to spend more time applying the message and less time trying to shoot the messenger over human weaknesses or other failings.

When revelation for a Stake or a Ward is in conflict with what Prophets have said then there is a problem.

I support this Stake Presidents efforts to motivate the members of his Stake. I don't support preaching incorrect doctrine to do so.

[estradling75]

When revelation for a Stake or a Ward is in conflict with what Prophets have said then there is a problem.

I support this Stake Presidents efforts to motivate the members of his Stake. I don't support preaching incorrect doctrine to do so.

I would say that poorly expressed doctrine (and all we have are soundbites of the total teachings which means we don't have context which could clarify his meaning) is not the same as incorrect doctrine.

I would think that the idea that if we become the kind of person who would neglect our temple recommend we will have a problem come judgement is sound doctrine. And it is also clear doctrine that the records of the church are going to play a role when judgement comes around. (Please note I said play a role, I know there are others factors as well.)

Therefore it would seem that being asked about a recommend could be a very valid question, come judgement. We can quibble over details on if it would be the first or most important question... But I think that if we are being judge and we are asked about anything and we go 'uh oh' that whatever that question was... We will find it to be a most important question.

Edited August 1, 2012 by estradling75

[Saguaro]

The Bishop and Stake President do not have to do the interview if the recommend is expired, a bishop's counselor or stake counselor can do them as well. According to handbook 1 the only cases in which a bishop must do the interview is if the person is doing their own endowment, getting married or sealed, or the person has not lived in the same ward/branch for a full year.

[Misshalfway]

As a side note....he also said in Stake Conference that we needed to focus on the temple but since we can't turn our houses so all the front doors face the temple, we should all get telescopes.

I think Apple's post explains my feelings the best. I have no problem whatsoever with a SP (or anyone for that matter) exhorting members to keep their recommends current. I simply have a problem with the doctrinal discrepancies in his approach.

Therefore it would seem that being asked about a recommend could be a very valid question, come judgement. We can quibble over details on if it would be the first or most important question... But I think that if we are being judge and we are asked about anything and we go 'uh oh' that whatever that question was... We will find it to be a most important question.

JAG... I appreciate your zealousness. But I'd like to understand if you have any doctrinal source to support the idea that the question "Was your TR current when you died?" will be part of the judgment.

Can you be sure that is not exactly what the Holy Spirit is prompting him to do?

What I can be sure of is the absence of the spirit I felt when he spoke this teaching.

I told this story to my dad who works regularly at the temple and asked how he felt about this teaching. He chuckled and said that God's going to be turning away lots of cute older folks. Cuz many times the older folks show up to do their temple shift and completely forget their card expired. :)

[MarginOfError]

The problem I have with what is being taught is "he often teaches that those who let it lapse even for a day will not be allowed into heaven."

That idea is utterly preposterous.

Full disclosure, the last time my temple recommend expired, it was 6 months before I got it renewed. It was also six months in which I knew full well I would be unable to attend the temple. Practically speaking, it just didn't become a priority to renew it when I knew that I wouldn't have opportunity to use it. If I still lived 12 hours from the nearest temple, I guarantee I wouldn't be at all concerned the expiration of my recommend. The recommend is just a piece of paper with a few signatures and a barcode. What is important is what it symbolizes, and I don't feel I need to hold the paper to maintain the significance of what it symbolizes.

I also get cynical when leaders use such drastic and manipulative rhetoric to push people to keep their recommends current. One of the metrics they have to report on each quarter is "Number of endowed members with a current temple recommend." This is my own personal failing, but when I see public manipulative statements like the ones this stake president made, the first thing that comes to mind is, "I have to get my numbers up." (I know it's unfair of assume this is the case, but it's how it comes across to me).

Anyway, I get why it's important to renew the temple recommend. Beyond maintaining our access to the temple, it's important to take the time to reflect on those questions and evaluate our own worthiness. I just don't feel that a bi-annual reflection on our worthiness that results in a piece of paper being put in my wallet is a suitable measure of my worthiness. Such reflection should happen much more often than every 24 months. And mostly, we shouldn't be telling people that whether or not the date on a piece of paper in their wallet is a litmus test for exaltation.

[Wingnut]

As a side note....he also said in Stake Conference that we needed to focus on the temple but since we can't turn our houses so all the front doors face the temple, we should all get telescopes.

Yeah, there's something wrong there.

What I can be sure of is the absence of the spirit I felt when he spoke this teaching.

This is telling.

[estradling75]

JAG... I appreciate your zealousness. But I'd like to understand if you have any doctrinal source to support the idea that the question "Was your TR current when you died?" will be part of the judgment.

I believe you meant me... As far as I can see JAG has not posted to this thread.

Lets talk doctrine... Start with President Hunter, speaking in conference, holding the role as President and Prophet of the Church.

?Exceeding Great and Precious Promises? - general-conference

I would like to point to about the 10th and 9th paragraph from the bottom this quote

It would please the Lord if every adult member would be worthy of—and carry—a current temple recommend.

It would seem that President Hunter and the Stake President are on the same page. The difference that I see is the President Hunter used 'Gentleness' your Stake President is using 'Sharpness' And you are complaining of the sharpness.

I would like to offer the suggestion that your Stake President might be finding himself in the same position as did Mormon in Moroni 9*

4 Behold, I am laboring with them continually; and when I speak the word of God with sharpness they tremble and anger against me; and when I use no sharpness they harden their hearts against it; wherefore, I fear lest the Spirit of the Lord hath ceased striving with them.

I can't know this of course... I only offer it as a suggestion or idea.

As to you question as to what can I use to point to say that the Temple Recommend will be used. I can not. However I have pointed out how our Doctrine can be open to the idea.

But the biggest proof is coming from you own leader. A leader whom we take as an article of faith to be '...called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority,' By your own words he has been doing this for 2 years. So for two years his councilors and the High Council, who are given the rights to advise and council the Stake President. Have understood his plan, its doctrinal roots, and either agreed with it or worked/working to correct him.

If I was in your Stake my first thought is that he is using Hyperbole as part of his attempt to reach the Hardened Heart. (not as an attempt to teach doctrine) Perhaps much like Jacob in the Book of Mormon, he would have preferred to use more gentle approach and can not. I would also realize that what he is asking of me is Doctrinally solid, and reasonably simple. I would do it. Knowing that I got the point. If it then turns out that my first thought of Hyperbole is correct then I have no loss because I got the point. But if it turns out that the Lord is/or chooses to sustain your Stake President in the matter of Asking about the Temple Recommend... well then I am prepared.

[Misshalfway]

OH shoot, Estradling75. I was posting last night after a 14 hour shift and considering a lot of JAG's posts. Please forgive me.

Like I said earlier. I don't have any problem whatsoever with admonitions for carrying a current recommend. My concern is with the doctrinal discrepancies and , as MOE said so well, the manipulative rhetoric that leads people into imbalanced and harmful beliefs.

And I'll add that I don't have any problem even with a soft or sharp approach. Sometimes a sharp tone is needful and can be spirit filled. Nor do I think me or the members of my stake are suffering from hard-hearted syndrome.

And I might have a different perspective than you do about sustaining leaders. I believe God uses the weak things of the world to get his work done. On that very day I met with the Stake President, I felt a huge wave of spirit flood my heart as I entered his office. It took me back. But I also remember a profound withdrawal of the spirit when he spoke those words. It was an interesting lesson for me to have been shown how God works with the imperfection. It taught me another lesson about sustaining leaders and trusting what God is doing with them, and also in balancing that with not always trusting the arm of the flesh.

What I am saying is that I do sustain my leaders, but I have learned through sad experience not to trust them implicitly. But I trust the spirit and I trust Father's wisdom. I trust the Lord will differentiate the wheat from the tares for me when it's needful .....even when he helps me discern it in my priesthood leaders.

BTW....you didn't answer my question.

Edited August 2, 2012 by Misshalfway

[estradling75]

OH shoot, Estradling75. I was posting last night after a 14 hour shift and considering a lot of JAG's posts. Please forgive me.

Not a problem although I am wondering if I should be flattered or not

BTW....you didn't answer my question.

I thought I did with this

As to you question as to what can I use to point to say that the Temple Recommend will be used. I can not. However I have pointed out how our Doctrine can be open to the idea.

However it was kind of buried in the middle... so it might have been missed... Or it might not have been the kind of answer you were looking for.

[Misshalfway]

Not a problem although I am wondering if I should be flattered or not

The truth is I enjoy reading both you and JAG. There. I've flattered both of you equally. :

However it was kind of buried in the middle... so it might have been missed... Or it might not have been the kind of answer you were looking for.

First mistake due to the 14 hour shift.

Second mistake due to the 14 hour shift hangover.

[Vort]

Not a problem although I am wondering if I should be flattered or not

I would be flattered to be mistaken for JaG, or estradling75, or any of several other regular posters on this board.

[beefche]

I would be flattered to be mistaken for JaG, or estradling75, or any of several other regular posters on this board.

Aww, thanks, Vort.

[kathysmike]

I bilt off the original direction ofthe OP point, my Mother renewed her recommend acouple weeks early, saw a member of the stake presidency on Tuseday. Thursday she presented her fully signed recomend @the temple was not in te system, same thing the following week, and again the third week, she was able to enter all 3 weeks after approval from the Temple Ppresident. After the 3rd week she called the stake clerk resp. for entering the recomends into the system, the councilor had seen a few members that same tuesday evening, left for Brazil the next day without turning his recomend book, the clerk took the needed info and entered it into the system.