Streamlined Temple

What would be neat is if we kept a few places, maybe older rural temples like Manti, where you could do live endowments or slower more participatory versions of the temple ceremony.

These sorts of changes would be easier if they did not have to be all or nothing.

To my way of thinking, the motion picture endowment was always a “lesser good” but that it was somehow ratified in the presence of Heaven by us also having the live endowment in a few places as we could.

Maybe that’s been incorrect because I believe they have eliminated all live (acted) endowments for the time being. But it partook (in my mind) via a best effort somewhere.

Temples as Shint? shrines: there are a thousand future Mormonisms I’ve dreamt of but that is a new delight.

!

With even the live endowments being ratified by their participation in the larger living endowment that is mortality.

Personally, what pains me is the slideshow format. I can see why they are doing it, with so many translations into so many languages; I can even see that they made a really beautiful slideshow. But a slideshow does not have the same effect as people reacting to one another, live or onscreen, with all the tiny changes of expression that affords. I do think that many of the most recent changes are good. I just cordially dislike slideshows.

The temple ordinances nevertheless bring me closer to God, which is the whole point, so I can bear with a little bit of human clumsiness in administration of said ordinances – even awkward CG slides.

This might be a complete tangent but this post made me think how sorrowful Lehi must have been the last time he visited the temple in Jerusalem.

The new format is longer than the covid format. To my understanding. Didn’t go during covid.

The new format (and presumed covid format) removes most opportunity for physical contact except in two instances near the end. This removes something big for the sister ordinance workers who now watch instead of participate. My wife was an ordinance worker and saddened at that.

This raised an eyebrow from me for the implication is that watching someone do an ordinance and considering yourself as having done it, is the same as you doing it, if authorized.

The implications are there for taking the sacrament remotely without touching bread or being baptized without water. Huh.

The new format makes frequent clarification about the Savior in relation to the temple. I think this makes the most sense because we now have a society that’s so irreligious that we run the risk of losing connection to him if we constantly rely on symbolism alone. That said, the temple is not for society, but disciples. So alas should that be necessary? Guess so obviously.

I don’t mind the slideshow, it’s equal to the videos to me, which were poor substitutes for the live endowment. The human frailty of feeling for the old man or woman striving to element God, Adam or Eve…. it was perfect. The fact that any and all of us could be right there imagining ourselves both in the role of the actor “on stage” in front of us but also metaphorically, we each had the potential for Godhood, first patents, or the devil in our potential was so plain and now it’s gone forever.

I definitely felt I needed to return and consider some more things that were adjusted or clarified. It’s always good to have things to think about.

But i too was deeply saddened in the middle of it as I also thought about my kids and what they’ll never know. I already had to wrestle with that issue with Manti being closed. That was a dagger to my heart. If the church said we need more volunteers to make live endowments possible or Manti is going to change, I would have cut my hours and moved my family there if needed. It meant that much to me.

So I feel your pain. I had to chide myself that it almost feels as if changes had been made by people who didn’t know what they were changing or unwilling or uncomfortable raising a voice to say, hold off on this.

But as I said, I chided myself. It’s almost 100% certain and more likely the changes will cause less confusion a d increase more faith by orders or magnitude compared to the old version that we all had to have that Jacob moment and wrestle with God to understand. Perhaps too many were unwilling to go through the effort to wrestle in the first place and just felt confused and frustrated and turned away.

So I SEE why the changes were introduced. But I weep a little inside for what was and is no more. But still, the idea of not needing physical contact seems to get really close to the line of why do this at all. If it’s about efficiency, let’s do 10 names at a time and consider each of them done with the same effort, right? Or remove the need for baptusmal fonts and

… replace them with TV screens.

But again, thats not my prerogative. I’m just thinking through things as I would. I still trust far more good than sadness comes from this.

I love the improvements they have made in the endowment. I LOVE them.

I wept.

The focus on Christ is wonderful. The music is better. The instruction is better.

I do miss the witness couple, but I saw things in this new version that I’ve never noticed before. It was exhilarating.

It’s ok to feel sad that your children will never serve as a witness at the altar, but his or her first experience in the endowment will be better than your experience with this new version. I promise.

Also, keep in mind that the actors in the film are actual temple workers. They must stay worthy in order to remain in the film. Every now and then you will see someone who is photoshopped out. That is why the slide show format is more practical. I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the church produce films for Africa and South America that feature actors that look more like the patrons.

I understand and agree. I appreciate you giving voice to the sadness of changes with an eye of faith. Some of my most sacred experiences have come from parts of the temple that are now gone, and I also weep inside for my children not being able to share those–knowing, of course, that they will have their own sacred experiences, and they never would have been truly THE SAME as mine anyway. I have a hard time separating sadness about change from faithlessness/criticism in my own thoughts, even though I can see and appreciate it in yours. I do feel guilt over it, like I shouldn’t be sad. You’re right though, I haven’t felt like I’m being chided when I pray about it. Perhaps there will be compensatory blessings for those of us who feel this sadness, if we look for them? If we keep going often and look for the good?

And, to be fair, the changes cannot be encapsulated in merely what they eliminate. I love Mike A’s comment for that reason.

Uniformity of experience is a reason that is frequently given for changes in church practice. When the church changed to two hours on Sunday, some relatives already had a stake assignment to be members of a small, distant branch in southern New Mexico. When the schedule change came to the church, they said, “That’s what our branch already does.” That’s the direction that uniformity takes because it really can’t go the other way. Back in the 1960s and 1970s when stakes were first being organized in most countries, I get a sense that it was the aim to have each of those far-flung stakes as fully functioning as the ones that had been organized decades before. Another half century of experience has taught us better than to expect that, so the church has shifted to a phase of paring down to the essentials, even in places that are capable of more.

This shift has already in progress before Russell Nelson became president of the church, but it could be that his experience growing up in Utah is one factor. All that 1930s and 1940s apparatus didn’t benefit him, the boy who feels like he had teach himself the gospel with a trip to the bookstore. Maybe that lack of connection with a beneficial culture also was felt when he entered the Salt Lake Temple 78 years ago.

My local temple is one of the landmarks, the Washington DC Temple. It was closed four years for renovation, and then to wait out the pandemic for a proper open house and rededication. Operations resumed in the fall have not been like before. Sessions once an hour, instead of every half hour as before the renovation, or every twenty minutes twenty years ago. No sessions until evening on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, none before 10 AM on Thursdays and Fridays. In other words, our experience now matches those entering most of the temples across the world, giving us some of that prioritized uniformity.

“the church has shifted to a phase of paring down to the essentials, even in places that are capable of more.”

From a central planning perspective, this is the aspect that worries me. Yes, we are the Lord’s church, so presumably we will not be susceptible to mans ways. Walls of Jericho tumbling, miracles, and all that.

But in any other instance, I’d suggest that when you standardize things (not talking about temple at this point anymore) to a lower level average you never develop a lot of the excellence that would have otherwise been created.

Small, perhaps trite and even uncharitable example: wards where wealthy members would fund lavish scout camps vs wards that used church funds only for their camps. Well, now we have pretty much neither. Is that better for the youth that some don’t have an extraordinary experience, some don’t have an average experience and now, ALL of them rarely have any camping experience at all?

Anti-nature folks, please don’t chime in with you dislike camping to begin with and just repent. We’re born of this world, of the dust, as it were, and we ought to be a part of it. We should certainly not lose touch with the joy of nature and just getting dirt on our hands and hair.

That scouting/camping example is also just an illustration. There are surely other areas where setting a standard in place absolutely does not elevate everyone to that standard, but reduces EVERY experience to that standard.

Case in point — ministering. As bad as home teaching may have been, would anyone suggest that as a result of the “higher and holier” ministering we have less companionships going and delivering a spiritual message. That’s holier?

To answer your question, sute, on if ministering is holier than the old system, for those who are doing it with the right intent, the answer is a resounding yes.

Spending your time worshipping in the temple on a Saturday is holier than sitting around watching football, but relatively few people do it in the church.

Those who want to be holy will do holy things.

Mike A –
Do you believe more companionships are ministering than before?

It is not my experience in 3 wards.

Previously, a small, but decent number of elders and hp in every ward I have been a part of went out at least half the months of the year, together, into the home of multiple families, and delivered a spiritual messaged, and looked for other opportunities to serve.

Now, it’s far rarer. In the old system, when lived to it’s original intent and the spirit of it, it was and should have been little to no different than ministering. Other than perhaps the first presidency message being a standardized thing that was shared/discussed.

But if anyone thinks that home teaching was not the greatest calling in the church….well, they probably never sat through a President Benson talk or been handed one of those pamphlets for another discussion in priesthood meeting.

This is not to say that “ministering is bad”. But I’m sadly seeing much less ministering than ever before. It’s strange that committed home teaching companionships prior to the change stopped going and making it spiritual in most cases.

But the bar was seemingly lowered and we didn’t get “more better examples” but we got more “lowering to average examples”.

Happy to be wrong on this front. Do you feel there are more companionships teaching the gospel in each others homes?

A member of my quorum made a request. He says his family needs old-fashioned home teaching from someone who will visit each month and share a message.

@sute – I have had experiences similar to yours in the three branches we’ve lived in for the past dozen years. At least when there was a message to deliver brothers and sisters made some effort because there was a reason to visit and make contact. Since ministering was implemented there has been much less contact. In my opinion this is mostly due to the fact that the quorum and RS leaders are not teaching enough “how to do it” or even encouraging ministering.
I really, really miss the monthly visits with a gospel discussion, testimony and prayer. I have fond memories of faithful home and visiting teachers who, just by their coming over, ministered to me and my family. I wish we could return to that mind set again.

Sute:

I agree with you that less visiting is taking place. We were pathetic with home teaching, always around 30% it seemed, and that number is even lower now because people don’t have to report back whether they did it or not.

That still doesn’t invalidate my point.

There will be no ministering lists in Zion. We will all care for one another because we love God and each other..

I believe the move from HT to ministering is an attempt to get us there.

Just because we aren’t doing very well at it doesn’t mean it’s not a higher, holier way. We just need to repent and do better.

Just my two cents. I appreciate the exchange and respect your thoughts. Best wishes.

@ Mike A,
I do think the changes to the temple experience were inspired – the flow of the ordinance is vastly improved and there is much that is good about the changes – and I understand the practical reasons for them. I just have a visceral dislike of the way that ‘practicality’ always seems to push aside beauty and rich symbolism, in the world as well as the church.

I’m not advocating for Byzantine rituals devoid of meaning and great in spectacle, nor baroque architecture so ornate that it dizzies the eye. However, it is undeniable that this world has lost very much beauty in the world in these past centuries, simply because we cannot be bothered to take the time to care.

Neither, it seems, are we able to parse symbolism. I am not saying that more clarity is a bad thing necessarily, it just seems like learning the mysteries of God ought to involve some asking, seeking, and knocking on our own time, rather than having each symbol spelled out as to a prescribed meaning.

On the subject of visiting – my YSA stake had, last quarter, at least 50% of companionships interviewed, and I know for a fact that most of those sisters were, in fact, ministering to one another, in ways large and small.

I totally agree with you that just because we’re bad at it doesn’t mean it wasn’t inspired. My Institute teacher made much the same point about 7-hour vs. 2-hour church; it depends entirely on how one is using one’s Sabbath.

My point with ministering is not that it’s a bad idea. The framing it in a Christlike way is obviously a sacred intent.

And our “anything and everything” counts is obviously accurate — visiting with someone at the grocery store is obviously expected and part of it. So too with sending a text message or dropping off a plate of cookies, or helping pull some weeds. I think in most cases that was understood about home teaching as well.

But isn’t the common experience everywhere that in lowering the standard (it all counts) we may have increased the number of people meeting that standard (maybe…maybe), but we definitely reduced the number of excellent companionships doing all the above in the process?

We can’t even follow the clear direction not to call them ministers — at least in my recent ward. At the outset it was clearly described as the awkward terms “ministering brothers” and “ministering sisters” and “not to be called ministers”. And at least in my neck of the woods, pretty much everyone from the bishop on down calls them ministers.

I don’t disagree at all with the framing that it should be holier. But I’m not sure I can square your framing of ministering as getting us to a list-free ministering Zion. Unless we’re going to be dropping the program entirely, we are still making companionships, assigning them families, and communicating with them about the families needs, etc.

Mostly, what we seem to be doing differently is not visiting as a companionship (or at all in more cases than before) and not delivering a message. There is literally nothing in the new ministering program, at least for me and how I’ve always approached home teaching, that is new, other than doing less with a companion. Before I met with a companion, prayed together before making a visit, shared a gospel message with the family and had a spiritual discussion. Gave blessings at other times. Organized service projects for the families at other times. Invited them to my home multiple times, loaned them needed pieces of equipment. Involved them in serving with me in other areas. Invited them to church activities. Invited them to non-church work activities. Gave them work opportunities. Thought about them. Prayed about them. Helped their kids. Asked their kids to help my kids. Helped around their house when there was need. Discussed important topics with the individually. I really don’t see how that was “less” holy than ministering.

That was always the standard. Not always able to live up to every month, but across a continuum of years it was clearly a holy practice.

This might seem like a ministering v. home teaching thing. I get the point of ministering. And that’s not what I’m getting at. As I said at the outset, it feels like what has happened is some places and areas where we excelled were just brought lower.

If we’re going to phase out the idea of companionships ministering and just go with an assign everyone to everyone approach, and then skip the computer work of doing the assigning and just tell everyone to assume they are assigned to everyone and can call on everyone….well, that’s all good too. And it might even be said to be “even holier”. But I can predict the result will be…even less ministering being done.

The end of home teaching made me think a lot of Isaiah Chapter 1. “Your feasts, new moons, sabbaths? The ones that I commanded you to observe? You’re really bad at them, and I am sick of your observances.” Suddenly we had leaders at the pulpit bad-mouthing home teaching, telling us that instead we should do “ministering” which sounded just like how we had been told for decades to do home teaching, just looser and without names for things in order to shake up our thinking. It was that thing where a teacher takes two synonyms and claims that one is really the evil counterfeit of the other.

The thing that caught my ear with ministering is the on-going diminution of priesthood in the functioning of the church. The tie from the Doctrine and Covenants to the Aaronic Priesthood office has been severed. No more “the teacher’s duty is to . . .” All the preaching about ministering addresses men and women alike, ministering sisters and brothers, with no teachers, priests, or elders mentioned.

A few years ago my ward’s scoutmaster was going to move, and the person who replaced told me, “I didn’t know if it would be me, though I thought it might, but I figured the way things had been going, whoever was called would be the ward’s last scoutmaster.” Half a year after I was ordained a high priest, the church decided that was going too far and removed me from the high priests’ quorum, along with all but a couple dozen ex officio members in each stake. My thought then, remembering the end of stake Seventies’ quorums in ’86, was “Two down, one to go.” I suspect that thirty years from now bishops will bless the sacrament and baptize our children. Men will serve missions and receive the endowment and sealing in the temples without ordination to priesthood office, just as women do now. Local priesthood will occupy the space currently occupied by the stake high priests’ quorum. And a vocal contingent will rejoice.

I loved Mike A.’s comment.

I loved all the comments. You are good people what goodness shines through.

Let us hope that JM is too gloomy.

–I’m not advocating for Byzantine rituals devoid of meaning and great in spectacle, nor baroque architecture so ornate that it dizzies the eye.

I’m not not advocating for that 🙂