Temple Assignment Assignments

[Guest]

Our ward makes assignments for temple work and bishops storehouse, etc. The assignments are made in January, for the entire year. In January I received, in writing, my assignments for the year - temple and bishops storehouse in Sept and Oct. I've never heard any complaints.

Maybe the issue is simply a function of lead time and communication?

[Rosebud]

I'm confused by the mandate to up the frequency of temple attendance. In my mind it seems similar to asking people to eat two or three pieces of bread for sacrament, or larger cups of water.

In our case the ever-prevalent criticism is that the temple sits empty most of the time. Church HQ doesn't like that kind of waste, so they respond in the way that they're most accustomed to responding: top-down mandates that get taken care of by the grunts. I'm not sure how far up the chain the actual practicalities of the "solutions" are mandated. Regardless of where the ideas begin, though, things feel the same to those at the bottom of the pyramid.

[TripletDaddy]

In our case the ever-prevalent criticism is that the temple sits empty most of the time. Church HQ doesn't like that kind of waste, so they respond in the way that they're most accustomed to responding: top-down mandates that get taken care of by the grunts. I'm not sure how far up the chain the actual practicalities of the "solutions" are mandated. Regardless of where the ideas begin, though, things feel the same to those at the bottom of the pyramid.

Well, I did ask for conjecture, so I'm in no position to differ with you. However it strikes me as bizarre that empty buildings would be the impetus. Large, empty, mostly unused buildings are the backbone of Mormon Manifest Destiny. All our buildings are under utilized.

Is it a revenue play? Operating temples at full capacity isn't exactly driving revenue, unless there is some correlation between increased temple attendance and larger fast offerings, for example. There are more tithe payers than temple attendees and tithing is a prerequisite to attendance anyway, so I don't see increased temple attendance as a driver for increased tithing.

[Rosebud]

Well, I did ask for conjecture, so I'm in no position to differ with you. However it strikes me as bizarre that empty buildings would be the impetus. Large, empty, mostly unused buildings are the backbone of Mormon Manifest Destiny. All our buildings are under utilized.

Is it a revenue play? Operating temples at full capacity isn't exactly driving revenue, unless there is some correlation between increased temple attendance and larger fast offerings, for example. There are more tithe payers than temple attendees and tithing is a prerequisite to attendance anyway, so I don't see increased temple attendance as a driver for increased tithing.

It's not conjecture in this case, although I of course can't say for whom the motive is revenue and for whom the motive is getting temple work done (or what other motives there may be, for that matter). An important thing to remember when considering motive in this case, at least IMO, is that there are many along the chain of command who strongly believe in the importance of work for the dead. They see the empty building and worry about people on the other side of the veil. It's a waste, in their minds, for the church to have invested resources in a building that isn't being used for its purpose. I guess dollars out should mean heavenly beings in......

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Why would SLC be calling for increased temple attendance? Is there a more pressing need to do work for the dead that did not exist before? Is the end at hand sooner than we think? are statistics showing that people are leaving the Church in greater numbers than previously, and the thought is that increased temple attendance reduces the chances of people leaving?

I'm confused by the mandate to up the frequency of temple attendance. In my mind it seems similar to asking people to eat two or three pieces of bread for sacrament, or larger cups of water.

I would be surprised if members are attending the temple as often as they were 10 years ago. Like Falafel mentioned earlier, the attendance numbers here in Vegas have been dropping for awhile. I would guess that despite the growth of the church and the increased number of temples, that fewer members are going. I'm sure that my example is just a desperate attempt to get people to cover the bare minimum.

Again, I sympathize with the frustration but the end result of this strategy is that my wife is even less likely to attend the temple as before the email. Which is in no way trying to say that we bare the responsibility of that.

[pelagius]

Is it a revenue play? Operating temples at full capacity isn't exactly driving revenue, unless there is some correlation between increased temple attendance and larger fast offerings, for example. There are more tithe payers than temple attendees and tithing is a prerequisite to attendance anyway, so I don't see increased temple attendance as a driver for increased tithing.

The church does a lot of longitudinal empirical work. If I had to guess, I bet the data indicate that regular temple attendance has predictive power for future activity in the church. I am guessing it is a fairly significant variable. My second leap is that many are interpreting that relation is a causal way (I think this is potentially problematic but I can see why it would be tempting to do so). Thus dropping temple attendance rates would be very concerning (if that is actually the case in general). Also, increasing temple attendance would have a very high priority in general if you believe temple attendance has a causal link with future activity.

[Moliere]

I know this would require pure conjecture, but when has that ever stopped this group.

Why would SLC be calling for increased temple attendance? Is there a more pressing need to do work for the dead that did not exist before? Is the end at hand sooner than we think? are statistics showing that people are leaving the Church in greater numbers than previously, and the thought is that increased temple attendance reduces the chances of people leaving?

I'm confused by the mandate to up the frequency of temple attendance. In my mind it seems similar to asking people to eat two or three pieces of bread for sacrament, or larger cups of water.

Because they are in freaking prison! They don't want to spend another day in prison, would you? Although I realize there are no days with God.

[TripletDaddy]

The church does a lot of longitudinal empirical work. If I had to guess, I bet the data indicate that regular temple attendance has predictive power for future activity in the church. I am guessing it is a fairly significant variable. My second leap is that many are interpreting that relation is a causal way (I think this is potentially problematic but I can see why it would be tempting to do so). Thus dropping temple attendance rates would be very concerning (if that is actually the case in general). Also, increasing temple attendance would have a very high priority in general if you believe temple attendance has a causal link with future activity.

So if I'm understanding your sexy talk correctly, perhaps there is a revenue component to it, if temple attendance really can be used as a predictive model for future activity (iow, tithing)?

I can see how temple attendance might be a factor in predicting future activity, however wouldn't the data be skewed by the fact that some of this attendance is now compulsory, either by fiat or by calling?

[kccougar]

Call me crazy but there may be some that actually believe temple worship might bring people closer to Christ.

[pelagius]

I can see how temple attendance might be a factor in predicting future activity, however wouldn't the data be skewed by the fact that some of this attendance is now compulsory, either by fiat or by calling?

I would agree with that entirely. Even if one believes temple attendance leads to spiritual experiences that bolster faith and lead to increased commitment and future activity, it seems likely that the link would be much less strong in the cases you mentioned. I am assuming that decision makers are either ignoring this effect or think this effect is small enough not to matter very much.

[TripletDaddy]

Call me crazy but there may be some that actually believe temple worship might bring people closer to Christ.

It brought people closer to Christ last year, too. So why the need to now call people as temple attenders and why a mandate to double temple attendance?

Christ is saying, "don't stand so close to me."

[RC Vikings]

It's time to revamp the whole temple experience. Cut out all the frills, cut the endowment down to about a 15 minute deal, do something about g's, make it more about marriage and open the ceremony up to everybody, take all the hours that people are taking to work in the temple and go out and use those hours to help others in the community. I think most people that go through do so because they feel like they have an obligation to go or they just like the feeling they get in there. I'm not sure how many actullay feel like they helped someone get in heaven.

[SCcoug]

Perhaps the brethren have found that doing the work for the dead needs to be done 20 times over instead of 10.

Really though I think a combination of reasons stated above (increased activity rates, bureaucratic inertia, bringing members to Christ). I'd also add that it seems to me that leadership see getting members to the temple often as a silver bullet to whatever problems they're facing at the time.

[Mormon Red Death]

I would be surprised if members are attending the temple as often as they were 10 years ago. Like Falafel mentioned earlier, the attendance numbers here in Vegas have been dropping for awhile. I would guess that despite the growth of the church and the increased number of temples, that fewer members are going. I'm sure that my example is just a desperate attempt to get people to cover the bare minimum.

Again, I sympathize with the frustration but the end result of this strategy is that my wife is even less likely to attend the temple as before the email. Which is in no way trying to say that we bare the responsibility of that.

Why would you think members are attending less? Members are probaly going the same its just there are more temples now. Ie demand has probably increased but supply has increased a lot more making it seem like less are going

Sent from my T-Mobile myTouch 3G Slide using Tapatalk

[Tim]

Call me crazy but there may be some that actually believe temple worship might bring people closer to Christ.

I'm sure it does, but for those who have no (or less) desire to be that invested, compelling them through "assignment" will likely do more to push them further away from Christ than closer to him.