Do Not Contact list

[Eric Werny-p40]

You just love them back to activity. If they feel love, needed and that someone actually cared about them, amazing things happen through the Spirit. They are never inactive, they are just missing our on blessing
and opportunities to be loved.

Pray over your families, with a sincere heart and with real intent. Have a Ward Fast for members.
And most off all, catch the ones that are right on the edge, and give them the touch of the Masters hand.

Eric

[jeffclark1070-p40]

I too have had this request and have tried to accomodate the asking parties however, my understanding of the position of the church is once you are a member you signed up for visits. Really the only way that someone will not be contacted is to have their name removed from the records of the church which is not easy. It is easier to be baptized and admitted into the church than removed. I believe that if a DNC list was needed in MLS the brethren would ask that a provision be put in MLS.

Twice a year we send out letters to members to gather any change of addresses that fall through the cracks. We do have people that call the Bishop and complain that they are not to be contacted. The Bishop usually tells them to write a letter to him requesting that their names be removed. I have been a clerk for 5 years and we haven't received a letter yet.

My thoughts on DNC are as follows. Each organization can keep their own list going. They can arrange HT lists to accomodate this. When there is a change in leadership the lists generally go away or don't get passed on which means that DNC people get visited by new presidencies. Some times miricles happen as the other brother indicated about a family that was activated. Maybe the DNC people are waiting for the right person to reach out and pull them back to church.

Those are my thoughts.

Thanks
Jeff

[RossEvans]

Church systems -- and, I believe, policy -- provide for no such designation as DNC, and I am quite sure its omission from MLS is deliberate.

That said, local priesthood leaders follow their own inspired judgment in how best to minister to these members. Many wards evolve some internal convention, such as assigning these households to special HT companionships or creating custom lists in MLS.

Our ward follow both those conventions. But I still recall the explicit directive from a former stake president elsewhere: "In this stake there is no such thing as a "Do Not Contact' member!"

This is one for your priesthood leaders to settle.

[jbh001]

Really the only way that someone will not be contacted is to have their name removed from the records of the church which is not easy.

Actually it is as easy as writing a note to the bishop/branch president with something to the effect of "please remove my name from the records of the church," and then signing it and dating it. The date might even be optional.

It might not be encouraged, but it definitely is easy.

The really hard part is trying to rejoin the Church after having your name removed from the records via this process. That may be one of the many reasons it is discouraged.

[jeffclark1070-p40]

Actually it starts with the simple letter but I believe the Bishop needs to fill out some paperwork and review with the Stake president who then approves these changes. I believe the stake president needs to approve any removal of names from the records, even the children of record that have not been baptized.

[jbh001]

Perhaps a review of the relevant portions of the handbook is in order (pp. 148-150). Your response still makes it sound like the process is more cumbersome than it really is. The role of the stake president in name removal requests is make sure the bishop followed policy and procedure in processing the request. There is no approval process outlined in the handbook.

Pages 145-146 of the handbook deal with canceling records for children of record that are 18 or older, but have not actually requested their names be removed from church records. That is a different scenario altogether and requires permission of the stake president prior to proactively canceling those records.

[lajackson]

Actually it is as easy as writing a note to the bishop/branch president ...

As a procedure, this is correct, along with the bishop's recommendation to the stake president, his permission to write the letter, then sending everything to CHQ.

I think where it becomes difficult is that, at least in my experience, most folks who wish to have their names removed from Church records still have a testimony. To actually sign the letter requires denying that testimony.

Most folks find that hard to do, even when they are really mad at the Church or the members.

[aebrown]

As a procedure, this is correct, along with the bishop's recommendation to the stake president, his permission to write the letter, then sending everything to CHQ.

There's actually another step, but without going into the specifics here, I'll just mention that when the bishop receives a letter from a member requesting that his/her name be removed from Church records, the bishop (probably a clerk, actually) uses MLS to prepare the Report of Administrative Action (in the Confidential Forms area). That form explains the procedure precisely.

[lajackson]

There's actually another step, ...

Well, yes. The bishop's recommendation is more than just a comment on the form. He has to do a little work before he does the actual writing, if he is going to write what he is asked to write.

Or, at least, he should. [grin]

[jbh001]

There's actually another step,

Which is why I made the referral to the handbook. That step is in there. Procedurally, this is all a simple process. Emotionally, well... that's a different matter altogether. But the process itself should not be made to appear more cumbersome or daunting than it really is.