Thursday, May 25, 2017

The 110 Rule - it's importance and explanation

James Tanner pretty much explains this rule to a tee!  His explanation comes from a 2015 Roots Tech update, but it is still prevalent today.

#RootsTech Update -- Discussion about the LDS 110 Year Rule

In doing Temple ordinances members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have been asked to observe what is called "the 110 Year Rule." The rule is currently stated as follows:
110 Year Rule:

To do ordinances for a deceased person who was born in the last 110 years, the following requirements must be met.
  • The person must have been deceased for at least one year.
  • You must either be one of the closest living relatives, or you must obtain permission from one of the closest living relatives. If you are not a spouse, child, parent, or sibling of the deceased, please obtain permission from one of the closest living relatives before doing the ordinances. The closest living relatives are an undivorced spouse (the spouse to whom the individual was married when he or she died), an adult child, a parent, or a brother or sister.
Verbal approval is acceptable. Family members should work together to determine when the ordinances will be done and who will do them.
 If you work with patrons at a major Family History Library or Center as I do, you will quickly understand the need for such a rule. Many times, people who are unrelated to the deceased person will find the availability of the ordinance work and perform the ordinances. This often causes extreme emotional distress to the close relatives who cannot understand why someone who was unrelated or even only distantly related would do the Temple work for someone else's father or mother, brother or sister, etc. Unfortunately, in the scramble to find "Green Arrows," the Rule is frequently ignored.

At the recent RootsTech conference in Salt Lake City, Utah, there was an undercurrent of discussion about this subject. I find this the topic of discussion constant among Church members as they focus on doing their family history. In fact, I was asked a question about the Rule just last night at a presentation my wife and I did in a ward here in Provo.

I have heard that the standards for complying with this 110 Year Rule may be tightened considerably by adding the requirement that the permission required be in writing and submitted for review before the work can be done. In addition, the identity of any person violating the rule will be available to FamilySearch and follow-up discipline may be imposed for any violation, including cutting off access to FamilySearch.org.

From my standpoint I certainly agree that more stringent measures should be taken. I have personally had to deal with grief-stricken members whose own parents' ordinances were done without permission and only shortly after death. I laud any efforts to tighten the requirements and impose penalties for violations.

Above Explanation from James Tanner's website
http://rejoiceandbeexceedingglad.blogspot.com/2014/11/explaining-110-year-rule.html

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
THE PERMISSION REQUIRED BANNER  
So, you have waited until the birthday of the 110th year from the date of their birth!  We were told that if your birthday was in September of 2016 and it is 110 years, you need to wait until after December 31st of that year.

Here are some facts that I gathered by asking some other Family History Professionals.  

1)  The Banner probably won't come up unless something needs to be edited, like a date needs to be standardized or place.
2)  People have be able to reserve ordinances the day a person turns 110.
3)  Someone born on August 2016 and the ordinances were done before Dec 31 2016 - no banner appeared.
4)  Here was an interesting situation:  A person was born in Feb of 1907 - no banner showed in 2017.  They clicked on the request and had no problem reserving, however, the SS was not available because the wife was born in 1912 - that ordinance needed permission.

No comments:

Post a Comment