LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L Archives

Archiver > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT > 2009-03 > 1237869832


From: "Sandra Anderson" <>
Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Which Utah temples accept FORs?
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 23:43:35 -0600


Jill,

"Come what may, and love it!" from Brother Wirthlin last conference.
Mighty good counsel.

Thanks, Sandy


Why Wait? Move to EarthLink.


> [Original Message]
> From: Jill N. Crandell <>
> To: <>
> Date: 3/23/2009 9:49:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Which Utah temples accept FORs?
>
> David wrote:
> you answered your own question in your reply to Ray Friess.
>
> Actually, I didn't. I was pointing out that if the roll-out was to be
> completed by July/August 2009, there would be no need for the issues that
we
> are dealing with for our family history teaching from September to
December
> 2009. We had a full discussion with FamilySearch folks from Salt Lake, and
> we were not told that the roll-out would be completed before the semester
> starts. As you might imagine, it's very difficult to teach a group of
> students when some have access to NFS and others do not. We have been
> creating double assignments for awhile, depending on what the students
have
> had access to. It has been a pain, but we are working with it. I'm not
> complaining, it's just a logistical issue for us. This is much different
> from teaching a ward where everyone has the same tools--regardless of what
> those tools are.
>
> David wrote:
> Each Temple district is brought into the system one a a time or 2.
>
> At this point, Utah and Idaho are being rolled out by stake, not temple
> district. It will be interesting to see how fast this process is
completed.
> Personally, I'm not counting on anything this summer. It will be nice if
it
> happens, but if not, we move forward anyway. "Come what may, and love it!"
>
> Jill Crandell
>
> Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to

> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe'
without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message


This thread: