Definitely not from the top down. But there were places outside the United States where they were absolutely required; there were heavy fines in a few cases for noncompliance.sandman45 wrote: ↑February 19th, 2022, 1:00 amUse of masks should never have been suggested.Subcomandante wrote: ↑February 18th, 2022, 12:34 pmThis should have been the guidance from the beginning, with the same modification shown for the discretion of the Area Presidencies and Stake Presidencies, applied to the temples.
I am glad to see that change as relating to local meetings. The use of masks should always have been left at the discretion of the local authorities considering they would know the conditions on the ground much better than the general leadership.
This is why I said this should have been a LOCAL approach instead of a TOP-DOWN, GENERAL approach, keeping in mind the local laws of different regions. I think bishops and stake presidents are more than smart enough to observe the local conditions to make the determinations, after consulting with the Area Presidency about them.
