New Temple Reservation Policy for FamilySearch

 

Note: This post only applies to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who are genealogists with names reserved for temple ordinances. For an explanation of temple ordinances see Temples. 

One of the long standing issues with the ordinance reservation process was that there was no limit to the number of reserved names any one individual could accumulate. In some cases, for some people, the number of reserved names gave them bragging rights. For some time now, there have been two programs that help to minimize the need for having a large number of people locked up in your reserved list. The first is Ordinances Ready. This program gives members of the Church the opportunity to find names for specific ordinances on demand at the time of a temple visit. The second important program involves changes to the way ordinances shared with the temple are available. Any name shared with the temple by you can be unshared as long as the ordinances have not been given to a temple for completion. In effect, your "reserved list" is obsolete. 

Now we come to the announcement that the "New Temple Reservation Policy Helps Youth and Individuals Enjoy More Temple Blessings." Here is a quote of the substance of this announcement. 

Starting on November 17, 2021, temple reservation lists with family names will have a new maximum of 300 reservations. If your temple reservation list has more than 300 reservations when the maximum is put in place, the reservations will remain on your list until they are completed or shared or until they reach their ordinary expiration date. The purpose of this new policy is to encourage more participation among all living relatives that share the same family lines, especially youth and new converts.

Here is a link to a more complete explanation of how this works, "Update for Temple Ordinance Reservation Lists—New 300 Count." Here is also an article answering questions about the change, "Answers to Questions | Personal Temple Reservation Lists, New Limit." 

From my own experience, I have been suggesting that a limit be imposed for many years now. There is a physical limit to how many ordinances one individual or one family can do and with the ability to share names with other family members and also retrieve those shared, the limit is reasonable.