posted
This is terrible- not referring to the sex life comment, but the way the scenes played out as according to Amancer and Valentine.
I don't know how the show's ratings for that episode compare to any of their average episodes, and haven't heard anything in particular about the episode from any friends or family. I'm not sure what effect the show and that episode will have, if any, but what's terrible is they didn't seem to be very tactful or tasteful with their portrayal of the temple ceremony and the LDS faith in general.
What does the producer and directors have against the LDS church, that they insist on using fabrication to suggest corruption and deceit?
Posts: 135 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The worst part is it's going to work. There will be plenty of people (well, not plenty, since not many people even watch this show) who are going to think the made up stuff is real.
Posts: 1287 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this is like what happened to the Catholic Church with The Da Vinci Code. That book and movie painted the Catholic Church as presently and historically corrupt and fabricated out of thin air "evidence" to do it with.
It's the price of a higher profile, I guess. Some people get a kick out of destruction - it makes them feel powerful to attack what others treasure.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hate to do this, but since you compared this show with the movie The Da Vinci Code, I had to point out a similarity- Tom Hanks. Tom Hanks produces Big Love, and he's the lead actor in The Da Vinci Code. Okay, it's a poor connection since actors have very little to do with the actual play or say of a movie, but there you go.
Katharina, I think you're right, some people get a kick out of destruction. I wonder how the Catholic church felt about The Da Vinci Code, and how they feel about its sequel, the movie Angels and Demons. If you want a movie that will show the church in a very poor light, it's that one. That movie won't be good for the Catholic church in my opinion.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
"There are many ceremonies in religions world-wide that are both sacred and not for general public viewing."
Can you name one that is "not for general public viewing," to the extent that an LDS temple wedding is?
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of the reasons that the da vinci code was so popular was that it came out at a time when many already believed the catholic church was corrupt. I'm not sure it convinced more then a few that the church was corrupt, because its audience had believed that prior to reading the book or seeing the movie.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Can you name one that is "not for general public viewing," to the extent that an LDS temple wedding is?
I know that when I tried to enter a mosque, I was turned away because I was not a Muslim. I was told several times that I should have my copy of the Koran taken from me by force because I was not a Muslim.
The choosing of a new Pope is not open to public scrutiny.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Posted by Katharina Yeah, the Tom Hanks connection is weak - he may have agreed to be part of it, but he didn't start either Da Vinci code project.
I don't think conspiracy theories about Tom Hanks are helpful. It doesn't take a conspiracy to make this an insensitive action.
You're right, and I didn't mean to implicate a conspiracy against Tom Hanks. I believe these entertainers are just trying to entertain their audience and make a buck- Like Ron Howard with the Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. I don't think he has any alterior motives with producing and directing these movies (he didn't produce Angels and Demons, only the Da Vinci Code), because he hasn't made any political statements against the Catholic church or its practices (to my knowledge). For Tom Hanks to make those comments about the LDS church, then produce the show that portrays the church in such a way, I start to wonder what his real motives are. His comments are posted at the top of page two.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:When she finds out that she's going to be excommunicated, she begs her sister and mother to let her borrow one of their temple recommends so that she can go one last time to partake in something that she sees as extremely holy and sacred. Her sister ... presumably gives Barb the recommend.
Ugh, ugh, ugh.
This just really makes me shudder. My first thought is that a person who would lend their recommend doesn't have much respect for the temple herself - but then I've never been begged by my much-beloved sister to borrow one.
I still can't imagine any excuse that would make me do it, but I'm glad I'm not in that position.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The last time I went to the temple, they scanned the barcode and checked my ID against the name on the reccomend. In other words, borrowing her sister's reccomend wouldn't work.
However, that has just been started in the last few years. Depending how long ago their ex-Mormon advisor left the church, I'm not surprised their information is out of date.
quote:His comments are posted at the top of page two.
I know - I posted a link to them as well. I just don't think that imaging what Tom Hanks's "real" motivations might be is useful in anyway. It is speculation, and rampant speculation is a big part of what we are objecting to.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: The last time I went to the temple, they scanned the barcode and checked my ID against the name on the reccomend. In other words, borrowing her sister's reccomend wouldn't work.
However, that has just been started in the last few years. Depending how long ago their ex-Mormon advisor left the church, I'm not surprised their information is out of date.
Which temple was this? I attended the Salt Lake Temple in December and wasn't asked for ID so it clearly isn't done everywhere or everytime.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: The last time I went to the temple, they scanned the barcode and checked my ID against the name on the reccomend. In other words, borrowing her sister's reccomend wouldn't work.
However, that has just been started in the last few years. Depending how long ago their ex-Mormon advisor left the church, I'm not surprised their information is out of date.
Which temple was this? I attended the Salt Lake Temple in December and wasn't asked for ID so it clearly isn't done everywhere or everytime.
I went to the Provo temple three weeks ago and they never asked for ID they just scanned my recommend and let me in. It occurred to me I could still easily get in with a recommend that was not mine.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Can you name one that is "not for general public viewing," to the extent that an LDS temple wedding is?
I know that when I tried to enter a mosque, I was turned away because I was not a Muslim. I was told several times that I should have my copy of the Koran taken from me by force because I was not a Muslim.
Where were you? I've visited plenty of mosques, in Albania, Turkey and the USA. I never tried to walk through while they were holding a service, and I didn't ask to see every single room in the building. But I'm about as non-Muslim-looking as you can get, and I was never made to feel anything but welcome while touring the mosques.
Posts: 2804 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't been asked for ID in Boston. Maybe the greeter in D.C. just thought Kat looked a little shifty.
I believe the Church temple committee is planning on linking temple recommends with a remotely stored photo, so when the barcode is scanned, the photo will appear on the greeter's computer screen, allowing for visual identity confirmation. Caveat: that information came second- or third-hand, so accept it with a grain of salt, I suppose. I did hear it from two independent sources, though (IIRC).
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: "There are many ceremonies in religions world-wide that are both sacred and not for general public viewing."
Can you name one that is "not for general public viewing," to the extent that an LDS temple wedding is?
First thing that came to mind was in Jewish temples when the ark was within that only the high priest was permitted to enter the holy of holies. Unbelievers were not permitted to enter the inner sanctums of the temple.
I also thought of Masonic rituals where only the initiated are permitted to participate.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Good to hear; I wasn't sure whether there were religious objections to allowing non-Muslims into the mosques, or whether it was a minority population being defensive.
I went in Italy, and it was not a time when services were being held.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I lived in Malaysia my entire family visited a mosque. They had my mother and sister wear clothes that covered their hair and everything below the neck, and we removed our shoes but other than that we were free to walk around and take in the beautiful building.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beleaguered: Katharina, I think you're right, some people get a kick out of destruction. I wonder how the Catholic church felt about The Da Vinci Code, and how they feel about its sequel, the movie Angels and Demons. If you want a movie that will show the church in a very poor light, it's that one. That movie won't be good for the Catholic church in my opinion.
To be fair, along with a lot of good stuff, there is enough weird, secretive, and gothically conspiratorial stuff in our history to feed the imaginations of scores of bad novelists. One of the side effects of a 2000 year old religion that has a great deal of money and power.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have also visited a mosque. There was a prayer service about to begin, and we were told that if we wanted to pray we were welcome to participate, but if not there was another room where we could sit and talk until the service was over. They didn't want sightseers in the room while the service was happening, which makes sense to me. When we toured a cathedral in London they had tourists walking through and taking pictures while the service was happening. That seemed odd.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not interested in the general public's opinions of temple ceremonies. Just for the record. It's not a performance, and I don't think you can lament things being public and then ask for opinions at the same time. The respectful will not wish to further offend, and the disrespectfuls' opinions would not be edifying.
I read a detailed account of the episode elsewhere and counted five inaccuracies (color of some clothing, color of the altar, the person whose recommend she was using being in the temple with her (what reccomend did that person use?), the time limit in the celestial room (no one will ever kick you out unless the temple itself is closing for the night), Barb asking to "take out her endowments" (that phrasing is only used for the first time you go, and it requires a different reccomend than the standard one) ). Six, if you count the apparent lack of ID check although apparently not all temples do that. However, it still isn't a big deal. It certainly was gratuitous, but it will fade away without any affect on the church.
posted
Discussion is further obstructed by the fact that despite nonbelievers knowing what goes on in the temple from watching this show or from another source Mormons still do not discuss in detail these ordinances outside the temple.
That pretty much leaves viewers to discuss them with other nonbelievers, apostates, and Mormons who can't constrain themselves. It's unfortunate that anybody had to be exposed to those sacraments in that manner, I wish all people could learn about them in the way with which they were designed.
posted
Having read a synopsis of the episode, the depiction of the temple is neither the source of most of the inaccuracies or the worst part. The stake president "admits" they are excommunicating her over the (imaginary) letter? Like polygamy wouldn't be enough? No, it has to be for corrupt and vindictive institutional reasons. Whatever story they are trying to tell, they are inventing a villian and pretending it is the church.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have some stuff that is that kind of secret. This is less the case since the Second Vatican Council (of course). In some places and at some times the Consecration part of the Mass was hidden (or at least somewhat obscured) from the congregation. Some places still celebrate that way.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The stake president "admits" they are excommunicating her over the (imaginary) letter?
I don't remember any such admission from the scene. She accused them of it being about the letter. They just ignored her and continued asking about repenting polygamy. They didn't say "what letter are you talking about?" so it did seem like they had at least heard of it, but it would be a bit of a stretch to say that they admitted something.
I did think her reaction about the undergarment question was a bit off. "Are you seriously asking me what underwear I am wearing?" Uh, yeah, that seems like a perfectly legitimate question to ask an LDS member. Not being a member, can't say if my reaction is valid or not.
I too wondered how the sister could be in there at the same time, but since I didn't know jack squat about the security process I assumed there must be some way.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I too wondered how the sister could be in there at the same time, but since I didn't know jack squat about the security process I assumed there must be some way.
There is only one recommend, and you show it as you walk in. For two people to get in on the same recommend, the person on the inside has to pass it to the person on the outside. I don't think that's possible without getting seriously squirrelly concerning exploring the temple and finding a back door somewhere. I mean, I'm sure there are emergency exits and things, but generally everyone goes in and out the same place. You can't just hand it over.
That's not even counting the bar code, which would show the same person entering the temple twice without the checker seeing them exit.
What temple were they supposed to be at? Salt Lake, right? Security IS pretty tight there - I don't think there is a way to slip a recommend back out again, really. I suspect that rather the storytellers wanted all three women there together and ignored the hows.
posted
That would mean someone else with a recommend was okay with handing it over. If it took the sobs of a dear sister to pry the one, I can't imagine what plausible excuse they'd have to have someone else convinced enough to break their promises and give it up.
posted
That's sort of self-defeating. One of the conditions of getting one is you won't loan or sell it. A member in good standing would not be okay with selling it (literally), and when it comes to blackmail, anything serious enough to be blackmailed about would bar someone from getting a recommend in the first place. I guess they could have lied in order to get the recommend, but at this point that's really, really a stretch.
Basically, loaning a recommend means you lose it at the next interview unless you lie, so I have a hard time believing a member in good standing would do it without a strong personal reason. A sister begging for one more chance I can believe. Loaning it to someone in the ward without explanation I can't. Any explanation would push the whole situation into seriously melodramatic, implausible territory.
posted
"I guess they could have lied in order to get the recommend, but at this point that's really, really a stretch."
You think it's a stretch to lie in order to get a recommend, or just that it would be hard to locate and pressure such a person?
Of course, there's always theft. Stealing a purse from a random woman in Utah bears a decent chance of walking away with a recommend. If you have access to a place where women leave them laying around, it'd be pretty darn easy to find one without immediately raising an alarm. Use it quick and you can easily get in before it's reported missing.
*Not a recommendation to steal, especially not worthiness cards.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Stealing a purse from a random woman in Utah bears a decent chance of walking away with a recommend.
Is it a requirement to keep them on you? Because it seems like this would be an important document you would want to keep in a safe place unless you needed it.
Posts: 212 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: That pretty much leaves viewers to discuss them with other nonbelievers, apostates, and Mormons who can't constrain themselves. It's unfortunate that anybody had to be exposed to those sacraments in that manner, I wish all people could learn about them in the way with which they were designed.
The LDS has the option to open the temples up to the public and show people the ceremonies if they wish to avoid this.
It is an option I expect to be exercised in my lifetime.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It is an option I expect to be exercised in my lifetime."
Do you mean allow public attendance, or simply to make the information (perhaps including a video recording) available through official channels?
The former I think is pretty unlikely. Maybe if you get old and everything else about society becomes very open and transparent in general leaving this as a rare exception for a number of years.
The latter I think is more likely.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it happened in isolation, it wouldn't be melodramatic. It is rare, though, so that it happens to occur at precisely the right moment so Barb's sister could pick it up the exact week she gives her own recommend to her sister is definitely a stretch. It isn't like there is a lively black market. If you lose yours, you get another one, but it has a different bar code and the previous one is no longer valid. It's like replacing a credit card, except they never go through the mail. You pick it up in person.
Basically, a single event wouldn't be compelely out there. However, the series of unlikely events and coincidences that would have to happen in order for Barb's sister to be in the temple after giving up her own recommend is definitely out there. It is possible to get out quickly and illicitly (using scifibum's suggestion), but I just can't see the character Barb's sister is supposed to be agonizing about giving her own recommend to her sister and then being okay with swiping the purse and using the worthiness card of a stranger off the street.
It's much more likely the writers were just lazy and/or don't understand how recommends work. That's my guess - their adviser's temple experiences predate the bar codes.
quote:It is an option I expect to be exercised in my lifetime.
Based on what? Augery?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Minerva: Can you report it lost/stolen and get another one?
If a recommend is lost, the person goes to the inteviewing Bishop and Stake President and requests a new one. The Bishop and Stake President maintain a record of what recommends were issued, when, and to whom, so once they verify this person had a recommend they can issue a new one. Or the person can simply go through the interview process again.
Before the bar codes were incorporated (about two years ago), the theft of a recommend would mean that there was a usable recommend in the hands of whomever stole it; there was no way to impede the use of the recommend. Now, when the person recognizes the theft and requests a new one, the previous one is deactivated and anyone attempting to use it would be asked some uncomfortable questions (albeit those questions are likely to come from a very friendly and non-threatening septagenarian).
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The LDS has the option to open the temples up to the public and show people the ceremonies if they wish to avoid this.
*nods* The best way to avoid mischaracterizations is to, um, characterize yourself.
I'd be thrilled to see an open discussion of the details of the temple ceremony from "proper" authorities on the subject. On everything else the answer is "If you want to know about Mormons, ask a Mormon?" I wish I could!
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Can you report it lost/stolen and get another one?
Yes, but they would cancel the old one and give you one with a new bar code on it. Then the temple would know that the old one had been canceled. They're good for two years, so if anything happens to a person to make them unable to attend the temple within the two years after the recommend was issued, it would still appear to be valid and could still be used by a dishonest person. I'm pretty sure that's the reason they instituted the whole bar code thing to begin with (that procedure's less than a year old) - so that you can't get in with an invalid recommend, or one that's been lost or stolen.
Edit: Or, what Kat and Senoj said.
quote:Is it a requirement to keep them on you? Because it seems like this would be an important document you would want to keep in a safe place unless you needed it.
No, but many people keep them in their wallets. I would think this is true even more so in Utah, where there are temples really close by and you could just go in before or after work without making a major trip of it.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is an option I expect to be exercised in my lifetime.
I expect to see that around the same time that women are given the priesthood and homosexual marriages are performed in the temple, both of which some people have been predicting for a long time.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
MattP, there are a few things that are specifically not ever going to be talked about outside the temple. Other things are at the discretion of the member - some people won't talk about it at all, just to be safe. Some will talk about it in the right setting and if they know the audience is respectful. I can't imagine talking about it on the internet, though. So you may have to actually talk to a Mormon if you have questions about the temple.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:So you may have to actually talk to a Mormon if you have questions about the temple.
I live in Provo, UT. Most of my friends and family are Mormon. No one has any clue what they can or can't talk about so they talk about nothing and refer me to the official statements which only paint things in broad swaths which don't address many of my questions; nevermind the questions that are likely to be raised by the answers to those.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the barcodes have only existed for 2 years, then it's easy. This is a flashback to 7 years ago.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:MattP, there are a few things that are specifically not ever going to be talked about outside the temple.
It seems possible that the church might eventually decide that the lesser of two evils is transparency, when the alternative is misrepresentation or misunderstanding on an unprecedented scale. The ease of accessing what non-Mormons want to say about what happens in the temple has risen drastically, while LDS remain mum (which in turn only tends to pique the curiosity of others who then go looking for the information that IS available all the more). Do you think the principle you're describing will always override such concerns?
(In fact, hasn't at least one government required the details of temple ceremonies before a temple was allowed to commence operations? Google is failing me here. My possibly-incorrect memory is that the response was to provide the requested details, with a plea to avoid needless publicity, because other concerns can override the importance of not disclosing the details outside the temple.) EDIT: I can find zero corroboration for this half-memory so I starting to think I'm wrong.
quote:Originally posted by katharina: There is only one recommend, and you show it as you walk in. For two people to get in on the same recommend, the person on the inside has to pass it to the person on the outside. I don't think that's possible without getting seriously squirrelly concerning exploring the temple and finding a back door somewhere. I mean, I'm sure there are emergency exits and things, but generally everyone goes in and out the same place. You can't just hand it over.
I didn't see the show, but this sort of locked-room mystery type stuff always intrigues me. Couldn't Barb have gone in with someone else by using the recommend document, then have the other person leave the temple and take the recommend back out [if it were in a purse or something, the other party might not even know what he or she was transporting] to her sister for the sister to [re]use? Or is it scanned on the way out to document exit (so that you'd have two entries without an intervening documented exit)?
quote:Originally posted by rivka: If the barcodes have only existed for 2 years, then it's easy. This is a flashback to 7 years ago.
Ah. Well, that would make more sense.
Still not interested in watching the episode, though. Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:So you may have to actually talk to a Mormon if you have questions about the temple.
I live in Provo, UT. Most of my friends and family are Mormon. No one has any clue what they can or can't talk about so they talk about nothing and refer me to the official statements which only paint things in broad swaths which don't address many of my questions; nevermind the questions that are likely to be raised by the answers to those.
I'll tell you this much. We make a promise not to talk about what goes on in the Temple. Perhaps you should care more that those who have visited the temple are not breaking promises and damaging their integrity to satisfy your curiosity. And I honestly think that the desire to have us do so is quite selfish.
The purpose for that promise, I think, is fairly simple. Each person's experiences in the temple will teach them something different. What each person learns helps them to understand the nature of God and the purpose of the Gospel and any insights they gain should only be applied to their own lives, not to the lives of others.
The insights I've gained from the temple have helped me progress on my own path and sharing those insights would do nothing to help anyone else.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: There is only one recommend, and you show it as you walk in. For two people to get in on the same recommend, the person on the inside has to pass it to the person on the outside. I don't think that's possible without getting seriously squirrelly concerning exploring the temple and finding a back door somewhere. I mean, I'm sure there are emergency exits and things, but generally everyone goes in and out the same place. You can't just hand it over.
I didn't see the show, but this sort of locked-room mystery type stuff always intrigues me. Couldn't Barb have gone in with someone else by using the recommend document, then have the other person leave the temple and take the recommend back out [if it were in a purse or something, the other party might not even know what he or she was transporting] to her sister for that person to use? Or is it scanned on the way out to document exit (so that you'd have two entries without an intervening documented exit)?
Pretty sure a person wishing to get in with another person's recommend would find very little in the way of resistance on the part of temple staff. Your method of getting two people in would most likely work without any difficulty. There is no scanning process for those exiting, in fact the computer scanning them in simply says, "Welcome brother/sister Smith."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
