some patrons need temple cards back.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: The key to knowing if a temple has transitioned to the new system is whether or not the patrons receive their cards back.

It doesn't matter what else is in place in terms of whether or not the temple has drawers (we normally would not know unless we visited where the processing takes place -- in the case of the Salt Lake Temple, I could leave up to five cards per ordinance back when my wife and I were serving our mission, and they would complete them within a few days).

I never saw where the cards were stored that I received back in the Salt Lake Temple. That wasn't the case with the Bountiful temple. Those were in plain sight.

LegacyUser

David Newton said: It's like the people who post here that Uncle Bob has the wrong date of birth. They have no comprehension of how many Bobs and Roberts there are in FSFT.

LegacyUser

Mary C Najar said: Thank you for your comments. In reference to RM, I was referring to transferring ordinance work from FT into RM, which you can still do. I have checked for merges, and didn't find any after the ordinance work was done. There have been some name changes, like adding middle names or removing names to align with how they were known as. I will continue to double check each one. Though on some of them the change log ends in 2012, when the moved over from nFS. The only one that has been corrected is one in which someone else came in and deleted the parent-child relationship instead of merging the parents. I restored and merged and now the ordinance is displaying correctly.

LegacyUser

Ron Tanner said: This is a bug. We are working on a fix but it is complicated as we are rewriting the software for performance.

LegacyUser

Rea Newell said: Having the physical card helps me with the flow of monitoring completed temple work, and I do keep them permanently for a record.

Your previously stated ideas about printing a PDF file of the cards, or taking a picture before you go in the temple only works if you are doing the temple work yourself. I give the physical cards to relatives to help do the work. When the ordinances (except for sealings) are complete, they give them back to me. I can then check to be sure all the appropriate ordinances (parents are sealed, etc.) are completed before we do the sealings together as a family. Having to only print one ordinance at a time to give to my relatives will be very time consuming and expensive.

I know that I can "share" through FS, and they can print the cards themselves, but I spent the time to find my ancestors, and I want to be sure that their temple work gets done, and then recorded in my desktop program. The best way for me to do that is to have the physical cards to track the work.

I have also had work that hasn't been recorded and I have had the "proof" because I had the card, not only when the work is done, but recorded work has disappeared and I have had to contact FS to get it restored.

I have enjoyed getting the messages that temple work from my file is completed, as I can see who in my family did the work by the temple the work was done in. But, as has been previously stated, if the card doesn't get scanned correctly, it won't show up in a message. My relatives that have the cards would have to go to that person in FS to check if it got recorded, because I won't know that they even attended the temple, and they won't have the names on their FS temple list to check.

My temple (St. Louis) only keeps cards for 30 days that aren't picked up, so it doesn't take much space.

If we aren't going to get cards back, it would be nice to have some sort of tracking list print when the cards are printed, but again, if only one ordinance is printed at a time, that increases the cost of paper and ink and storage of all those separate tracking sheets.

If this is what the First Presidency want us to do, I will adapt and find a way to make the new system work, but I wish I didn't have to!

LegacyUser

Rea Newell said: If I can't get the physical cards back (which would still be my preference), having a "completed" temple work tab with all the work which has been done for the relatives I have reserved work for would be helpful to me. Since I share the actual cards with my relatives, I would more easily be able to find what work has been completed to track it. With the current message system (which I do like), I am not able to search for a specific person to see their completed work. Being able to sort that list in various ways would be helpful.

LegacyUser

Dellory Louise Matthews said: It's happening for some temples. The members in those areas have been notified by email and through Priesthood leaders. I know someone personally who is affected in Utah County.

LegacyUser

David Roderick McLean said: They could just "Copy" the cards and record them at their leisure. If a member is willing to spend 2 hours doing an ordinance, its OK if the Temple Department choose to spend $.02 on a copy before handing back the card to the patron.

LegacyUser

Brett said: David

I LOVE it.
So simple.
I have been suggesting that there were other alternatives/options.
This is another one.

Brett

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Copying a card runs the same risk as scanning: having two cards stick together.

The whole purpose behind this is to reduce or hopefully, eliminate the risk)

LegacyUser

David Roderick McLean said: This comes down to the conscientiousness of the office workers. I think it can be worked out. They can "scan" the copy just as easy as the original. This suggestion just speeds up the process.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: The problem is speeding up the process. The originals will be kept by the temple for the purpose (or so we have been told) of auditing the ordinance(s), to make sure they were recorded correctly.

The temple staff may be willing (if they are authorized to do so) to scan the card(s) and give the copy to the patron. We don't know and are speculating what might be the case.

LegacyUser

Mary C Najar said: I was able to correct all the errors in the display of the SP.

One involved a parent-child relationship deleted in 2018. The relationship was deleted because it was a duplicate that could not be merged due to identical PID's The child was removed, which removed the SP to the child, her 3 siblings and her 8 children. When I restored the relationship the SP for all were restored. I then removed the parent and the SP's for all remained correct.

The others were due to merges in 2018. The incorrectly displayed SP occurred for all siblings. I had to restore the deleted person, then I looked for any children in the deleted persons record that had the SP ordinance done. When I re-merged, I look for those children, then I clicked on replace and moved them over to the left side. This cleared up the problem for all the siblings.

If the merge was with the child, I restored the deleted person and switched the position so that the person remaining had the SP ordinance.

Everything is displaying correctly.

Until the bug is fixed, I will check for the SP ordinance for the person and/or their children associated with the soon to be deleted person in a merge.

Thanks for your help. This has been a most informative group.

LegacyUser

W David Samuelsen said: Tom, what originals? They get shredded per the ordinance secretary I talked with earlier, if not picked up promptly by patrons within specific time periods. Salt Lake Temple is already on new system. Ditto for Bountiful Temple. It is responsibility of the patrons to make advance arrangements for certain ordinances to pick up the cards promptly, not weeks later.

No such scanners to scan whole cards. Only the bar codes.

LegacyUser

W David Samuelsen said: Have ANY of you actually call the temples in questions related to YOUR cards and ask to speak with ordinance secretary. They are more than happy to explain what is expected in their specific temple districts.

I know what will be with Provo City Center Temple, Bountiful Utah Temple and Salt Lake Temple concerning the cards.

Don't be afraid to call your respective temples and find out exact how to take care of your cards.

Be specific about each ordinance steps (baptism and confirmation are combined as one).

LegacyUser

Christopher R Schmink said: Nathan, respectfully I'd suggest that the temple system, NOT FamilySearch, is "the ultimate arbiter of truth." And beyond that, records are kept in heaven as well, as the scriptures attest. Do you really believe the Lord is going to deny any person any blessing because of a mistake (unintentional, careless, or even malicious) by someone here on earth that did not properly complete and/or record an ordinance? There is a bigger picture here. And yes, I PERSONALLY wish I could keep all my future ordinance cards. But as Phil Jeffrey has been pointing out, there is far more going on behind the scenes to resolve the problems you bring up, and those discussions are going on at the highest levels. Our personal beliefs and comfort levels are dictated by our limited view of the scope of things, and sometimes we (that includes me) allow them to override an appropriate view of the bigger picture.

LegacyUser

Christopher R Schmink said: Jeff, there is a far greater amount of "reservation hoarding" than most people have any idea - thus the change to a 2-year maximum (which is also far too long in many cases). We tend to forget THE bigger picture - there are very real, very aware people anxiously awaiting the completion of THEIR ordinances, and our inefficient and sometimes abused system of getting that done keeps those who are waiting in a state of great anticipation. The relief and joy for those that accept the ordinances is greater than most of us here can even imagine. We need to get these done, not sit on a piece of paper for years sometimes! What if was OUR work, and we had zero control over whether our own ordinances were ever completed? ....

LegacyUser

Christopher R Schmink said: Brett, just my guess - but based on what I do know about these changes - if everyone was as diligent as you seem to be about getting cards back and then turning around and getting the uncompleted ordinances done in a very timely manner, it's possible we would not be in this situation. But unfortunately there are very, very large numbers of people that are very casual about the cards they bring to the temples, and in some temples those cards have sat for years without being discarded - in hopes that people will come back and get them. After years of sitting, many of the "uncompleted" ordinance turn out to have been done anyway, apparently by other people when the 2-year reservation runs out, or as temple file names. The whole world does not work by any one individuals personal "rules" or preferences (for better or worse). ;-)

LegacyUser

Christopher R Schmink said: I would be concerned that Facebook is not an appropriate forum to discuss sacred temple ordinance work procedures in public.... Those that don't believe as we do could twist and "use" discussions such as this for purposes that would be neither fair nor in the Church's best interest.

LegacyUser

Christopher R Schmink said: Thanks, Ron. And for the rest of us, THAT is why the Church wisely institutes test programs in limited areas before rolling out something Church-wide. Yes, a few of those in the test areas may be inconvenienced, but the greater purpose behind all this isn't always going to be fully visible to all of us at the general level. These changes are NOT being done at lower levels outside the awareness and direct involvement of the most senior priesthood leaders.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Ron Tanner does discuss temple ordinances from time to time. He spent quite a bit of time talking about the SP ordinance where the parent's vicarious ordinances could not be performed, but the names were known.

As one of the main managers over Family Search, Ron is perhaps in the best position to discuss these kinds of matters.

The church is working toward more transparency including what goes on inside the temple and certain aspects of our lives as it pertains to sacred covenants that we make. For instance, see https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/t.... Something of that nature was never brought up not that long ago (maybe a decade or less).

Talking about things of this nature in the correct context is clearing away a lot of the mystique that has (in the past) surrounded our way of life. The Joseph Smith Papers, a large multi-volume set, provides details about the life of the Prophet that had often been distorted in the past. So I'm not surprised to see Ron discuss temple ordinances and the policies concerning them.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: I didn't suggest that FamilySearch was the ultimate arbiter of truth. Please read more carefully.

I believe that those who do not have ordinances done for them--do not have their ordinances done. Will the Lord make sure they get them eventually? Of course! Does that mean we shouldn't care about making sure our relatives get ordinances, because the Lord will eventually clean up our mistakes? Of course not!

The persistent argument that there is more going on at FS than we know about is frankly obvious. Because we don't know all that is going on, should we therefore not voice our concerns or provide feedback on this feedback forum designed to gather input from users? It is a non-sequitur.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: That said, Ron Tanner has told me he is aware of my feedback and they are exploring options--what more could I ask? I am especially appreciative of how FS has acknowledged and participated in this discussion. It has been enlightening and helpful.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Before we accuse others of forgetting the bigger picture and ignoring the needs of others, we should seek to understand their perspective. Perhaps their hoarding isn't usually all about selfishness?

LegacyUser

Ron Tanner said: The following is an updated proposal on a "Completed" Temple list to help with card replacement. I have been discussing this with the teams and we believe we can print the card exactly as it was when it was originally printed - regardless of changes that occurred on the PID post printing. We do save some data now.

Would this satisfy the needs to have a card available (but not given back at the temple) - instead you print it from your completed list?

For future we are also looking at recording more information about relationships, the family and more details in the future and can consider, when we do this, to change the "Completed" document to include more information printed on the memento which represents what the "family" looks like at card printing time. If we decide to do this sometime in the future.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: This would be very useful from my standpoint, both for record keeping and later investigation. Including relationships at time of printing would be even better.

Thanks again for looking into this.

LegacyUser

Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: I like that, thank you for listening
Emmanuella

LegacyUser

Richard M. Smith said: Ron: Does "complete" mean after each ordinance, or B/C thru sealing?I have a lot of my names in "Shared", so wait a LONG time for male endowments to get done. Seeing the present "Completed"helps me keep track of them, individually, but printed cards are ultimately what I use for Sealings. Do you mean we can keep track of them "paperlessly", then simply print off the sealing, for example? If so, I think it is a good compromise.

LegacyUser

Ron Tanner said: Yes as long as the same reservation is involved in the scenario you state. For example - Child individual ordinances, or same child and parents, or same spouses

LegacyUser

Richard M. Smith said: I'd LOVE it!