Limited-Use Recommend without LCR?
Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 9:41 pm
Hey everyone. Got a crazy situation here, one of those wonderful moments where the technology that makes our lives easier, 99.99% of the time, is suddenly making things difficult for that other 0.01%.
My eldest turns twelve in November, which of course has her extremely excited to do proxy work in the temple. Unfortunately, it turns out the first youth temple trip after her birthday is during Christmas vacation, right on my wife’s and my 20th wedding anniversary—obviously not a great date for us to be taking her. So, we decided that since both sets of grandparents live within an hour of a temple, we’ll spend Thanksgiving with one extended family or the other, then the next day, leave our other kids to play while dw and I take dd to the nearest temple. Dd was totally on board, and everything sounded great. There was just one little problem: her birthday is on Thanksgiving, so if we’re out of town, there’s no time for her to have her bishop’s interview.
Now, I’ve been a clerk four times, so I know that guidelines are often just that: guidelines. Even when I was in Young Men, I had a friend who was ordained a priest at age 15. As a missionary, there was a sister in my district who had only been a member of the Church for eight months, yet was serving a full-time mission without even being endowed or going to the MTC. There’s doctrine and then there’s policy, and I figured waiting until your 12th birthday for a temple recommend interview is just policy—a fact that our bishop confirmed. He thanked me for bringing this up, so far ahead of time; and said he’d interview her a week or two before her birthday. Sounds great, right?
Wrong.
It seems that about 18 months ago, the Church moved all limited-use recommends to LCR. This means that the software is now in charge of who qualifies for a recommend and who doesn’t, and its strict interpretation prevents that option from even appearing for an eleven-year-old. Our bishop tried to get the ball rolling, but this simple Boolean flag stymied his efforts to do so. So, he offered to meet with dd at 8:00 Thanksgiving morning, since the option will then appear on her record—an offer that speaks tremendously to his character and commitment. Unfortunately, while I’m absolutely grateful, it doesn’t solve the problem if we’re already several hours away. The interview has to be before her birthday, or she’s going to be almost 12½ before her next realistic opportunity to attend the temple—quite disheartening for a petulant pubescent who’s excited for the temple now.
So… long introduction for a fairly simple question: how can my bishop get a limited use recommend without using LCR? All the paper copies were seemingly destroyed, so there doesn’t seem to be any chance of just digging an old one out of the filing cabinet. Does the Church even still make them, perhaps for less-connected parts of the world? If not, can a bishop request an override of the flag that prevents the option from showing up? (I’m a database application developer by trade, so I know this is technically possible, but if it isn’t already there, would be deceptively nontrivial to add.) Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks!
My eldest turns twelve in November, which of course has her extremely excited to do proxy work in the temple. Unfortunately, it turns out the first youth temple trip after her birthday is during Christmas vacation, right on my wife’s and my 20th wedding anniversary—obviously not a great date for us to be taking her. So, we decided that since both sets of grandparents live within an hour of a temple, we’ll spend Thanksgiving with one extended family or the other, then the next day, leave our other kids to play while dw and I take dd to the nearest temple. Dd was totally on board, and everything sounded great. There was just one little problem: her birthday is on Thanksgiving, so if we’re out of town, there’s no time for her to have her bishop’s interview.
Now, I’ve been a clerk four times, so I know that guidelines are often just that: guidelines. Even when I was in Young Men, I had a friend who was ordained a priest at age 15. As a missionary, there was a sister in my district who had only been a member of the Church for eight months, yet was serving a full-time mission without even being endowed or going to the MTC. There’s doctrine and then there’s policy, and I figured waiting until your 12th birthday for a temple recommend interview is just policy—a fact that our bishop confirmed. He thanked me for bringing this up, so far ahead of time; and said he’d interview her a week or two before her birthday. Sounds great, right?
Wrong.
It seems that about 18 months ago, the Church moved all limited-use recommends to LCR. This means that the software is now in charge of who qualifies for a recommend and who doesn’t, and its strict interpretation prevents that option from even appearing for an eleven-year-old. Our bishop tried to get the ball rolling, but this simple Boolean flag stymied his efforts to do so. So, he offered to meet with dd at 8:00 Thanksgiving morning, since the option will then appear on her record—an offer that speaks tremendously to his character and commitment. Unfortunately, while I’m absolutely grateful, it doesn’t solve the problem if we’re already several hours away. The interview has to be before her birthday, or she’s going to be almost 12½ before her next realistic opportunity to attend the temple—quite disheartening for a petulant pubescent who’s excited for the temple now.
So… long introduction for a fairly simple question: how can my bishop get a limited use recommend without using LCR? All the paper copies were seemingly destroyed, so there doesn’t seem to be any chance of just digging an old one out of the filing cabinet. Does the Church even still make them, perhaps for less-connected parts of the world? If not, can a bishop request an override of the flag that prevents the option from showing up? (I’m a database application developer by trade, so I know this is technically possible, but if it isn’t already there, would be deceptively nontrivial to add.) Any guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks!