Would You Lie to Get a Temple Recommend?: Sunstone Symp 2007

"Do You Have a Testimony Of ...?" was by far the most enjoyable session of the symposium, and being the last session I attended, it was an entertaining conclusion to three days of Sunstone.  From the program:

People who have much in common can still look at things very differently. Case in point: James McLachlan and Tom Kimball have been enjoying an ongoing discussion about their Mormon beliefs.  Both have contemplated similar historical and philosophical dilemmas, and both are active in their home wards. One holds a current temple recommend while the other doesn’t hold much hope of ever having one again. “Sin isn’t the hold-up. For me, it is an issue of integrity as I don’t believe in the Restoration,” says Tom. “But perhaps you do believe in the Restoration. It may only be a matter of what you think the “Restoration” means,” says Jim.  Come listen in on and join their discussion!

So when you go into get a temple recommend and the bishop asks you "Do you have a testimony of the Restoration?" what exactly goes through you mind?  Is your idea and understanding of the "restoration" different from your Bishop's understanding, and if it is, then do you answer yes or no?

The session was headed by John Dehlin, providing the list of temple recommend interview questions, that were then discussed one by one between Tom and Jim.  You could tell that Tom and Jim were having a ton of fun, kidding and challenging each other like only good friends can.  If there is one audio of this year's symposium I want, it is this one.  Despite the humor and laughing that was dominant throughout the session, it didn't detract from the seriousness of the issues that were being raised.

Tom, who is clearly a honest, good guy, fully active in church, has serious doubts about the restoration and so feels that he can't have a temple recommend because of those doubts.   He talked about how sometimes when we are answering the temple recommend questions, we have a internal dialogue going on before we answer. He gave an analogy that comes from the musical Fiddler on the Roof.  I'm not familiar with the movie so I may remember this incorrectly, but a scene occurs when Tevye needs to provide an answer to a question regarding a daughter's marriage.  Time stops and Tevye talks to himself saying, well on this hand such and such, but on the other hand such and such.  Time begins and Tevye provides the answer that people want to hear despite his questions regarding "on the other hand."  Tom suggested that when we ignore "on the other hand" moments so we can get the recommend, is not being completely honest with our bishops and stake presidents.

Jim on the other feels that maybe Tom is going to far, and should cut himself a little slack.  The question of whether one person's idea of the restoration is the same as the Bishop's is of little concern, because everyone has a slightly different view of what "restoration" really means.  So if you are fully active in the church and living a decent, moral life, doubts shouldn't prevent you from getting a recommend.

I think they are both right to a certain degree.  I think Tom makes an excellent point; if your doubts include ideas that Joseph Smith never saw God or angels, then answering no to the question of restoration is being honest.  But on the other hand, when asked about "do you pay a full tithing," and you tithe on your net, while your bishop tithes on his gross, and you answer yes to the question, I think it is still being honest.

The whole discussion has been with me since the symposium and is one I will not forget.  Do yourself a favor and get the audio, my summary does not do it any justice.

Comments

[Behind the Infamous Veil]

This is an interesting question, and I'd love to hear from your readers what they think!
I've found that if the bishop/SP has time, they will listen to many concerns and even outright "no" answers and still give you a recommend. I've had a couple of questions that I've had problems with and I haven't been denied a recommend. However, there are times they are in a real hurry and they just want you to answer "yes," and get it over with. In those cases, I just give them what they want to hear. To me the important question is the one at the end where you are asked if you feel worthy to enter the Temple. It's important to be honest with yourself. If you feel you shouldn't be there, don't go.

[Tom]

Dallas

Kind words, thanks. The session went better than I could have wished. Humor is my fall back for being nervous and I was concerned that people would think that we were making light of a serious topic. The session had a target audience. Mostly people like myself who have chosen to remain active in the LDS faith despite having serious misgivings about issues of credibility and integrity. I have learned to care a great deal for my ward family. Despite watching me go through my crisis of faith, my ward allowed me and at times encouraged me to take an active role in our religious and neighborhood community. In many ways I’ve made peace with difficult aspects of my Mormon tradition. The errors are still errors, but I’m finding ways to live with them and remain active. As my children are beginning to get older, I have felt for some time that I need to begin coming to grips with the idea that I’m raising my children as Latter-day Saints and they will most likely serve missions and marry in LDS temples. In what ways will I participate in these milestone events? Will I sit in some waiting room? Will I be home watching sports. Or will I sit next to my sons and be their escort through these rites? I appreciated Jim for having this conversation with me. There are still several issues of integrity that I have to sort out. My hope is that when the time comes, I will have given these issues the proper attention so that whatever my choice is, it is one that I can live with while showing respect to my children at the same time.

Tom Kimball

[Dallas R]

Thanks for the added perspective.

[Dale Porter]

As with all things pertaining to the Temple, the only thing that truly matters is our own understanding. We will all learn line upon line, precept upon precept. Covenants are personal; we are held accountable for our own actions, not the actions or knowledge of others. When I answer the questions associated with the Temple recommend, I will answer and be held accountable for my personal understanding and beliefs. I read, pray and study all I can about the Gospel of Jesus Christ, with the full understanding that as my knowledge increases so does my responsibility. The Temple experience should be different for everyone; personal revelation just happens to work that way.

[Guessed]

The recommend questions are IMO easier for married people. I think in the case of single people, they have to lie or at least prevaricate, especially about the Law of Chastity question. Since single people don't have a husband or wife to whom they are legally married, every initimate act (including solo) is violating that law. I have never met a red-blooded single person who feels he/she ISN'T lying when answering at least that temple recommend question.

[convertmolley]

Does anyone know if you can get a temple recommend if you only attend Sacrament meeting, but skip out on the other two meetings? I am a woman, and I don't like either Sunday School or Relief Society. Let me know if you have any experience with this.

[Eric]

If you don't like learning about the gospel in the last 2 meetings why would you be a candidate for higher learning through temple worship? Do you just want the recommend for social reasons?

[Eric]

If you don't like learning about the gospel in the last 2 meetings why would you be a candidate for higher learning through temple worship? Do you just want the recommend for social reasons?

[adam]

Maybe, but in my experience "temple worship" is much more interesting and spiritual than the Block is, especially with a baby who's cranky because he missed his nap. Sometimes I wish I could just go to Sacrament mtg.

However, I do think that for the most part, we get out of the meetings what we put into them.

[Perry L. Porter]

Eric wrote: "If you don't like learning about the gospel in the last 2 meetings why would you be a candidate for higher learning through temple worship? Do you just want the recommend for social reasons?"

Well Eric, after decades of correlation, where the same material is repeated over and over and over every 4 years, I pretty much had it down and was not learning anything new about the 2nd time around. I lean much more from independent study, than from going to priesthood or Sunday school to hear a watered down lesson.

Now the new lessons manual's are an improvement, but still....

Two hours of mind numbing repetition to glean one or two sentences of enlightenment is hardly cost effective.

Eric, I get the idea that you are encouraging conformity for conformity's sake.

As far as "higher learning" going on in the temple, after the 5th visit, of hearing the exact same thing over and over creates a situation where you learn something new?

Could not the same be done with Yoga or meditation?

Think outside the box, rather then trying to cram everyone into a very small one.

That is what I think would make a better world.

Perry

[sam]

Perry,

I cannot imagine you are serious?

You heard "the same lesson" (doubtful) every 4 years and so you don't go. But somehow you go to the Temple, which is pretty much the exact same presentation everytime and that's just swell?

"Two hours of mind numbing repetition to glean one or two sentences of enlightenment is hardly cost effective."

You say that, and on the other hand I say that a lifetime of struggle, pain, tears, misery, joy, smiles, fighting, hard work, etc. is what we pay to learn only a few lessons.

Hugh Nibley is someone who I assume more intellectualy than you and I remarked that he learns something new everytime he goes to the Temple.

I think the same should be said about us in our meetings. It isn't always the case, but that has more to do with each of US individually than the meeting itself.

We had a lesson last Sunday that was screwed up. The teacher taught from "The Introduction" rather than "Life and Ministry of Joseph Smith".

It could have been exceedingly dull if you didn't have the right attitude.

I learned several things which would be helpful for my family and myself if I can actually implement them!