some patrons need temple cards back.
Comments
-
Carolyn Wheeler said: If I understand Ron correctly from his Facebook Live sessions, NO cards will be returned. If there are still ordinances left to do then the patron will have to print the cards again. As an example, if a card has five ordinances to do, and the patron does just one ordinance per Temple visit, then the card will need to be printed five times.0
-
Richard M. Smith said: Exactly. That is my point earlier in this string.
Dick Smith0 -
Carolyn Wheeler said: At first I didn’t think I would like this change (and I still won’t if they don’t get the bugs mentioned below worked out), but I do like the idea that not returning the cards will reduce the duplication of ordinances.
I’m sure they will get the kinks worked out, but still I will definitely be printing duplicate cards in addition to ,pdf copies.
One thing I plan on doing is printing a copy of the individual ordinance card before the final ordinance is done. That way I will have a printed card with four completed ordinance dates and temples - you never know when that might come in handy. However, it does seem that all this extra card printing is going to increase my need for shoeboxes.
0 -
Nathan Twyman said: If the card you have has printed rather than stamped ordinance dates, then it is always possible that the identity of that person changed in Family Tree after the ordinance was completed, but before you printed the card. Thus, printed dates on ordinance cards are not authoritative.0
-
David Newton said: But, but, but you said the card was THE definitive record. Could it be you're wrong? Oh perish the thought!0
-
Nathan Twyman said: I made no such claim. I'm not sure if that was sarcasm.0
-
Carolyn Wheeler said: Yes, the PIDs may change, but the ordinances can be tracked by the PID they were done for and by other info on the card. Granted, it may require assistance by opening a support case, but they can still be tracked.
I have had people and ordinances that were lost (as in buried) by really bad merges. The only way that Support was able to find them was because I had kept the completed ordinance cards - so even though the PIDs may change they still retain their value.
Nope, doubt that David is being sarcastic. Think of it more as dry and witty. I just love his sense of humor. He cuts to the chase and doesn’t mince words. Hmm... something tells me that he has that English sense of understatement. [Oh, dear, if he’s not English I shall hear about it. ] 0 -
Carolyn Wheeler said: It seems that we will end up with multiple cards per person. I plan on stapling all the cards (for the person) together. That way there is a record of any PID changes.0
-
Brett said: David
in relation to your comment ...
And, regardless of who said it ...
'Yes', for a number of Members of the Church (as, I cannot speak for all), the "Completed" CARD, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", is the DEFINITIVE record.
That CARD is what PROVES (in fact, is, the 'Evidential Proof') that the Work was actually undertaken, certainly NOT the "Recording" of the Work in the "System".
Not being a Member of the Church, you would not understand the importance of the "Completed" CARD, to many of us Members; and, the reason that we want to collect and RETAIN the "Completed" and processed CARDS.
'Yes' ... we now live in a "Digital" age; but, it is still nice to be able to 'hold onto' something tangible, even that be a piece of paper.
Many of us Members of the Church, still, maintain; and, retain, "Hard Copy" Genealogical records (even, a 'Book of Remembrance'); and, we also like to, 'Hold onto'; and, retain, those, "Completed" and processed CARDS.
Not to mention, that the "Completed" and processed CARD, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", is 'Evidential Proof' that the Work was actually undertaken on/at a specific 'Date' and 'Temple' - which can then be SCANNED and submitted in a 'Support Case' to address/fix a problem/issue.
Brett0 -
David Newton said: I was being somewhat facaecious in my comment.
Thing is that from what I can tell the definitive record for the ordinances is the database thereof, with the cards serving as a temporary record of whatever it is that is done behind closed doors in the temples until the information is entered in the central database. Previously the central database wasn't the definitive record. It was previously a kind of central card index that tried to be the definitive record. However with input lag, indexing difficulty and the massive duplication of effort that occurred in genealogy caused huge problems with duplicate ordinances. In other words lots of Brigham Youngs had their ordinances done multiple times.
This latest shift is merely another step along the process of moving to complete computerisation of the workflow. Obviously the physical ceremony can't be computerised, but I wouldn't be surprised if another step in that process is eliminating printing of things in the first place. So perhaps instead of printing an ordinances card, an app is used for the reservation process and then the ordinances get flagged in the app and not printed. The temple visit then occurs and whatever is done is done. At the end of the ceremony the ceremony leader then marks the flagged ordinances as done there and then.
What I think occurs is that people get invested in the process and not the end result. What is theologically important to you? It is theologically important that each person has correct ordinances performed once and once only in an ideal world. Overall if Brigham Young gets his ordinances done again it does his eternal soul no harm, but wastes time that could be used to do ordinances for other people.
People get so used to the ordinance card printing process that they believe it is what is important. They invest an almost mythical status into the cards. The cards are a record of what took place and nothing more. Once the information is entered into the central database they are no longer even the definitive record of what occurred. Combine that with a strong reluctance to move away from paper records overall due to massive inertia and a somewhat competitive streak amongst some temple attendees (witness the massive name reservation lists some people like to hoard) and you get threads like this.
The most important question people should be asking is will this change increase the accuracy of the recording of ordinances? Concerns about waste due to printing things multiple times for a single person are valid. Concerns about it spoiling the personal processes individuals have come up with are not. Yes some people like to keep a massive stack of paper records. That is their personal choice and can have no bearing on how the overall process operates.
I have asked before why the whole process can't be computerised? It seems the temple department has no theological objection to that occurring, they just have practical obstacles to deal with to achieve that goal.
Oh and Carolyn has indeed got it correct about my abode and culture.0 -
Brett said: David
Of course, I realised that you were being "... somewhat facaecious ...".
The Work in "Physical"; hence, vicarious Work for the Dead.
The "Computerisation" relates to the recording and processing.
Personally, I truly hope that they NEVER do away with the CARDS.
But, that is just me.
Brett0 -
Brett said: David
As to NOT returning of the, "Completed"; and, subsequently processed, CARDS ...
And, in answer to you question, "... will this change increase the accuracy of the recording of ordinances?"
The simple answer is, 'No', not really, it will not.
You cannot stop 'Human Error'.
Brett0 -
Carolyn Wheeler said: In my heart of hearts I would love for the entire process to be completely digitized with no paper copy, but that process is in its infancy and cannot be trusted, so, until the day it can be trusted, I want my paper cards!!!0
-
Carolyn Wheeler said: Hah! I knew I was right about David. Wouldn’t be a bit surprised if he turned out to be an English cousin. Cheerio! :-)0
-
Tom Huber said: Seems to me that a lot of folks are overlooking what has been told to us by FamilySearch:
1. "this was talked about for a long time and approved by the 1st Presidency and to change it would take the same level "
That means that any concerns really need to be taken up with your local Priesthood leadership. That is the only way that the concerns will go up through the proper channels.
2. "Many of the errors were caused by the human factor of rushing to get the cards to the office so patrons could get them."
3. "Temples don't want to be card repositories and have to manage that. My temple has a massive desk full of cards that go back years in many cases." (Phil Jeffery)
4. "If you get outside of US and specifically outside Utah and Idaho many new smaller temples don't have the space, temple workers and organization to manage cards. Many have very limited hours as well."
5. "This applies to all cards that you take to the temple. Once an ordnance is done the temple will keep the card for a very short limited time."
6. There was a comment somewhere that there will be additional training for the staff of the temples as the program is implemented. I could not find the thread in which that comment was made.
7. "The temple system was enhanced with some additional checks and balances so you shouldn't have to have cards or call the temple going forward and its working very well in pilot temples."
The above points (except #6) were made by Phil Jeffrey.0 -
W David Samuelsen said: 7. "The temple system was enhanced with some additional checks and balances so you shouldn't have to have cards or call the temple going forward and its working very well in pilot temples."
Failed in my most recent case - 3 baptisms were not recorded. I discovered them after reviewing the cards against the FamilyTree on account of need to check for new hints, etc few days later.
These 3 were very new additions to FamilyTree.
So the person responsible for recording failed to catch these 3 out of more than 100 baptisms done that day (I was there good 4 hours overseeing the distribution and return of the family cards.) And no I can't return to the same temple since it is closed July 1 to 15th).0 -
Mary C Najar said: I had the same problem occur on 29 June 2019 twice in the Set Louis Temple. It also occurred last year. When I contacted FS they said it could take months to correct. I turned it over to the recorder. Our cards are our only tangible proof that the work has been done. Printing duplicate cards won't provide the proof, the check marks and date stamps that show the work has been done.0
-
David Newton said: It's a date stamp, a code for the temple and a red tick mark in a box. That's not "proof". That's so easy to fake that it's laughable. Why someone might want to fake it, I don't know, but it is so very, very far from being proof of something happening that's it's almost comical. It's administratively filling in a form, it's not proof of anything at all.
What really would be proof? Digital signature that the ordinance has been performed by the person performing the ceremony. That is actual proof and is extremely hard to fake. Can't happen at the moment due to infrastructure and workflow issues, but it may well be a part of the eventual all-digital workflow they seem to be aiming for.0 -
Jeff Wiseman said: David, I don't think that faking records is an issue at all here. The concern is when you've done the work and for some reason you can't find it recorded in the system. If the time stamps are there with the check marks, then you can be reasonably assured that the work for that card was done based on the process that is used to stamp and check the card.
There seem to be at least 2 problems here. One is when a card doesn't get recorded when the work was actually completed (even if the timestamps are mistakenly there). Having a card, a person can go back and have the records corrected.
The other problem is where a given PID has a long merge history where other duplicates have been brought in, each with their own set of ordinance statuses. You can usually trace back through the change history on a person to find earlier PIDs, but when they have been deleted through merging, even though you can view the deleted PID record, you cannot see the ordinance data that is associated with it.
Part of the issue here is the confidence (or lack thereof) in the human parts of the problem. We DO and HAVE seen times when a record doesn't get updated properly. Without my own personal record, how am I supposed to see this? I personally don't mind FS moving in this direction in attempting to solve other issues. However, changes made by FS in the past just do NOT instill a stellar sense of confidence in their system! Now they are moving in a direction that eliminates one of the few devices that there is for people to check the work that was supposedly done for a person in the database.
This is akin to going into a store to buy something, but the store refuses to give you a receipt.
I think it is a very good idea that they are rolling this out slowly so that any kinks in the process where mistakes can be missed are identified. Again, I don't mind this myself but it is completely understandable why some people would want to keep their "receipts" for the ordinance work they did. And this so that they can by themselves check to see if online records have been updated correctly (especially if you can't trust the "system" to get it right).0 -
Nathan Twyman said: Its more like getting a digital receipt saying something was purchased, but the receipt isn't specific enough about what was purchased so it isn't very useful.0
-
Nathan Twyman said: "The most important question people should be asking is will this change increase the accuracy of the recording of ordinances?" I disagree. Long-term preservation of accurate records is just as important as recording it correctly the first time.0
-
Nathan Twyman said: No one is assigning a mythical status to cards, but many here have pointed out specific example use cases that describe their very real value--value that goes far beyond preventing a few duplicate ordinances.
The claim that cards are no longer authoritative once the ordinances are entered into the database is false. Physical cards are commonly used to correct the digital record.
Disclaimer 1: To be clear since I was called out on this earlier--I am not claiming that the cards are infallible, nor am I claiming that cards could never be trumped by other records under certain circumstances.
Disclaimer 2: To be clear, I am still not advocating for keeping the cards.0 -
Tom Huber said: You were attending a temple that still used the old system. That was apparent from the cards that you scanned and posted. The new system is selectively being rolled out, so temples that are not converted to the new system will still be using the old system where the staff has to rush in scanning the completed ordinances to get the cards back to the patron.0
-
W David Samuelsen said: Tom, Salt Lake Temple is using new system already and practically enforce the Law of Two Witnesses and this temple does NOT have file drawers at all.
Out of more than 100 cards, 3 slipped through. Keep in mind in the baptistry - the youths are delegated the responsibility of scanning the completed cards under watch of the worker before the cards are stamped.
On that particular day I was there, everybody got 3 cards to do baptisms in the afternoon. One youth obvious did not do it right, meaning I have to be on watch for those that slipped by. These 3 baptisms have to be redone after July 15th.
Jon Thomas,
It is clearly the sealing office workers did not follow the Law. Each card has to be scanned in presence of another witness before the card can be stamped. In your case, the cards were not scanned properly.0 -
Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: when a person is scanning you have to listen for the beep, before you pass it on to the stamping person. If there is not beep, it is not recorded but if it is stamped it looks like it was recorded.0
-
Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: if the people scanning and stamping are talking to each other, it is easy to make a mistake.0
-
Brett said: W David
You cannot stop 'Human Error'.
None of us are perfect.
And, as per your comment; at least, in the "Baptistery", you can retain the CARDS.
Brett0 -
Brett said: Emmanuella
You cannot stop 'Human Error'.
None of us are perfect.
Hence, the reason WHY I want those, supposedly, "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", back, to retain those CARDS as 'Evidential Proof' that the Work was actually undertaken - and, NOT have to be told (Oh, you will just have) to do it AGAIN.
Brett0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Brett, most of those cards are printed for baptism and confirmation only. They get returned regardless.0
-
Brett said: W David
I Know.
I for one, would not be like/appreciate (especially close Ancestral/Family) 'Cards' with the "Other" Work being available; and, NOT getting those (especially close Ancestral/Family) 'Cards' back - having to "Re-Print" them EACH time, the next stage, of the Work needs to be done.
Brett0
This discussion has been closed.