Local Leaders In Boston Stake Reduce 3-Hour Block - Sorta

[smac97]

Here:
 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints may start testing shorter Sunday church meetings in January, according to a podcaster’s report. 

 

According to a post on the Facebook page for Mormon Stories podcast founder John Dehlin, a Boston LDS stake is going to have a two hour and 15 minute meeting block instead of the three hours Mormons are used to, with sacrament last. 

 

Here is the FB post:

 

A Boston LDS Stake is reporting the following starting January 2016:

 

"2 hrs 15 min Sunday service. 45 mins per meeting. Sacrament will be last. Elimination of all but essential Sunday meetings, i.e. fewer firesides, choir rehearsals, etc. Emphasis of the day is the taking of the Sacrament, and having time for families."

 

However, this story did not last long (it was reported only earlier today):

 

Local church leaders from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in Boston changed their minds after a report surfaced earlier today that they were going to test shorter Sunday church meetings beginning in January.

 

LDS Church spokesperson Dale Jones issued the following statement Monday, Nov. 23:

 

"After recognizing it was not within Church guidelines, local Church leadership in the Boston Massachusetts Stake decided to drop plans to shorten the standard Sunday worship meeting schedule. The two-month experiment set to begin in the stake in January was planned locally with good intentions to better observe the Sabbath Day.”

 

I have heard reports from a person whom I believe to be a very credible source that the Church does, in fact, have a reduced meeting schedule in some places.  I'll see if I can get more information about this.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

[carbon dioxide]

I see no reason that the Church block could not go down 2.5 hours.  I am all for it.

[strappinglad]

Isn't it nice to have friends in every ward ? Facebook is such a tool!

[Scott Lloyd]

Eliminating choir rehearsals would not shorten the meeting block in any ward I've ever belonged to. And doing away with ward choirs -- or diminishing their quality by making less practice time available -- would be a great loss.

Edited November 24, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[jcake]

Amen to the value of choirs, and the wonderful feeling and spirit they bring to meetings.

[Thinking]

Even if this were true, somebody in some leadership position would take advantage of the extra time and schedule some auxiliary meetings.

[Scott Lloyd]

Putting aside the question of whether shortening the block is advisable, I'm wondering how a stake leadership could have gotten off the rails this badly. It's not as though we live in a time when communication with Church headquarters is difficult. And in a place like Boston they could be expected to be literate enough to read and comprehend a handbook.

[Scott Lloyd]

Even if this were true, somebody in some leadership position would take advantage of the extra time and schedule some auxiliary meetings.

Or more likely, members would fill the extra time with activities out of keeping with the Sabbath.

[The Nehor]

I know of one case where a bishop shut down the meeting after the sacrament was taken to emphasize that that was the key. He apologized to those who prepared for other meetings that day and ended the block.

 

It happens occasionally here in Texas due to weather that we shorten or cancel the block. When we get sleet we get it bad and unlike up North we do not have the equipment to deal with it and people are terrible at driving in it.

[Scott Lloyd]

I know of one case where a bishop shut down the meeting after the sacrament was taken to emphasize that that was the key. He apologized to those who prepared for other meetings that day and ended the block.

 

It happens occasionally here in Texas due to weather that we shorten or cancel the block. When we get sleet we get it bad and unlike up North we do not have the equipment to deal with it and people are terrible at driving in it.

I think an incidental thing like that is different from what's under discussion here. I'm guessing the Boston stake president got quite a talking-to. The rapidity with which headquarters dealt with this thing is dizzying.

[mfbukowski]

 

Here:

 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints may start testing shorter Sunday church meetings in January, according to a podcaster’s report. 

 

According to a post on the Facebook page for Mormon Stories podcast founder John Dehlin, a Boston LDS stake is going to have a two hour and 15 minute meeting block instead of the three hours Mormons are used to, with sacrament last. 

 

Here is the FB post:

 

A Boston LDS Stake is reporting the following starting January 2016:

 

"2 hrs 15 min Sunday service. 45 mins per meeting. Sacrament will be last. Elimination of all but essential Sunday meetings, i.e. fewer firesides, choir rehearsals, etc. Emphasis of the day is the taking of the Sacrament, and having time for families."

 

However, this story did not last long (it was reported only earlier today):

 

Local church leaders from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in Boston changed their minds after a report surfaced earlier today that they were going to test shorter Sunday church meetings beginning in January.

 

LDS Church spokesperson Dale Jones issued the following statement Monday, Nov. 23:

 

"After recognizing it was not within Church guidelines, local Church leadership in the Boston Massachusetts Stake decided to drop plans to shorten the standard Sunday worship meeting schedule. The two-month experiment set to begin in the stake in January was planned locally with good intentions to better observe the Sabbath Day.”

 

I have heard reports from a person whom I believe to be a very credible source that the Church does, in fact, have a reduced meeting schedule in some places.  I'll see if I can get more information about this.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

Which conclusively proves how much local leaders really look at the Handbook.

 

Standard operating procedure is do what you like until you get reprimanded and then plead ignorance.  The idea that the Handbook is followed robotically.is just not the case.  It is seldom even read much less followed.

 

I think these leaders did not even have a clue they were doing something not permitted until their attention was specifically called to the matter.

[Thinking]

Or more likely, members would fill the extra time with activities out of keeping with the Sabbath.

 

"The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath."

[mfbukowski]

Putting aside the question of whether shortening the block is advisable, I'm wondering how a stake leadership could have gotten off the rails this badly. It's not as though we live in a time when communication with Church headquarters is difficult. And in a place like Boston they could be expected to be literate enough to read and comprehend a handbook.

It really becomes a question of how much in control local authorities feel.  Salt Lake is a long ways from Boston in a lot of ways.  Out here in the "mission field" there is less of a feeling of a centralized, cohesive church.  We have investigators pop in off the street who have just been going down the block visiting all the churches looking for one to go to.  They don't even know that "Mormons are different".  They are looking for a Praise Fellowship just like the one next door and start clapping after the music and wonder why everyone stares at them for doing so.

 

There is a feeling of isolation "out here" of circling the wagons, of being all alone in the wilderness without support, thousands of miles from church "civilization".  The differences are such that there is a feeling that "headquarters doesn't know how it really is in our neck of the woods and we gotta take care of our own".

 

When one is a bishop one feels like the "guy from the stake" is out to add more programs to his plate and make the bishop's life harder.  When one is a stake leader one wonders why these bishops refuse to follow directions.

 

I think it is less like that in Utah- I know we have discussed that jokingly, but I am convinced that the difference is real.  Driving downtown in your own city and seeing the Church Office Building tower and the SLC temple, and the Brigham Young house and monuments etc- in your back yard- I think just naturally gives one a clear notion of being at the center of a worldwide organization with central authority.

 

Out here in the boonies, you feel like Louis and Clark in the middle of no where, surrounded by the enemy waiting for a dispatch by telegraph that never comes while the secular "enemy" lurks behind every tree trying to lure away your members.  You want to keep them happy so they keep coming back, never thinking that "Headquarters" could possibly object to what you think needs to be done

 

I am convinced the psychology is really quite different "out here"

Edited November 24, 2015 by mfbukowski

[The Nehor]

"The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath."

 

And the sabbath was made to be observed.

[Rain]

Ten years ago we attended a ward in San Diego that was 15 minutes short of 3 hours. I remarked to someone that we got out early. She told me there were 6 wards in the building so they had to shorten the time to get everyone in.

If I remember right another building has now been put in and they no longer need to do that.

[Tacenda]

It really becomes a question of how much in control local authorities feel.  Salt Lake is a long ways from Boston in a lot of ways.  Out here in the "mission field" there is less of a feeling of a centralized, cohesive church.  We have investigators pop in off the street who have just been going down the block visiting all the churches looking for one to go to.  They don't even know that "Mormons are different".  They are looking for a Praise Fellowship just like the one next door and start clapping after the music and wonder why everyone stares at them for doing so.

 

There is a feeling of isolation "out here" of circling the wagons, of being all alone in the wilderness without support, thousands of miles from church "civilization".  The differences are such that there is a feeling that "headquarters doesn't know how it really is in our neck of the woods and we gotta take care of our own".

 

When one is a bishop one feels like the "guy from the stake" is out to add more programs to his plate and make the bishop's life harder.  When one is a stake leader one wonders why these bishops refuse to follow directions.

 

I think it is less like that in Utah- I know we have discussed that jokingly, but I am convinced that the difference is real.  Driving downtown in your own city and seeing the Church Office Building tower and the SLC temple, and the Brigham Young house and monuments etc- in your back yard- I think just naturally gives one a clear notion of being at the center of a worldwide organization with central authority.

 

Out here in the boonies, you feel like Louis and Clark in the middle of no where, surrounded by the enemy waiting for a dispatch by telegraph that never comes while the secular "enemy" lurks behind every tree trying to lure away your members.  You want to keep them happy so they keep coming back, never thinking that "Headquarters" could possibly object to what you think needs to be done

 

I am convinced the psychology is really quite different "out here"

It's that and then some, as far as living in and around the church headquarters bubble. I don't know, but think it would be very cool to have the diversity you've got. If you've been to a ward here in Utah I wonder the difference it would be or was. Practically every neighborhood I've lived in, the majority are active members, so not just members but active.

[mfbukowski]

It's that and then some, as far as living in and around the church headquarters bubble. I don't know, but think it would be very cool to have the diversity you've got. If you've been to a ward here in Utah I wonder the difference it would be or was. Practically every neighborhood I've lived in, the majority are active members, so not just members but active.

I have frankly felt uncomfortable in an all white homogeneous congregation. Everyone looks like there 10 face types, and they repeat. Senior male Type 7. Primary Female 3, blonde and blue dress.

[Avatar4321]

It really becomes a question of how much in control local authorities feel.  Salt Lake is a long ways from Boston in a lot of ways.  Out here in the "mission field" there is less of a feeling of a centralized, cohesive church.  We have investigators pop in off the street who have just been going down the block visiting all the churches looking for one to go to.  They don't even know that "Mormons are different".  They are looking for a Praise Fellowship just like the one next door and start clapping after the music and wonder why everyone stares at them for doing so.

 

There is a feeling of isolation "out here" of circling the wagons, of being all alone in the wilderness without support, thousands of miles from church "civilization".  The differences are such that there is a feeling that "headquarters doesn't know how it really is in our neck of the woods and we gotta take care of our own".

 

When one is a bishop one feels like the "guy from the stake" is out to add more programs to his plate and make the bishop's life harder.  When one is a stake leader one wonders why these bishops refuse to follow directions.

 

I think it is less like that in Utah- I know we have discussed that jokingly, but I am convinced that the difference is real.  Driving downtown in your own city and seeing the Church Office Building tower and the SLC temple, and the Brigham Young house and monuments etc- in your back yard- I think just naturally gives one a clear notion of being at the center of a worldwide organization with central authority.

 

Out here in the boonies, you feel like Louis and Clark in the middle of no where, surrounded by the enemy waiting for a dispatch by telegraph that never comes while the secular "enemy" lurks behind every tree trying to lure away your members.  You want to keep them happy so they keep coming back, never thinking that "Headquarters" could possibly object to what you think needs to be done

 

I am convinced the psychology is really quite different "out here"

I've lived out of Utah all my life and I've never seen a ward or stake with that attitude.

[Hamba Tuhan]

The idea that the Handbook is followed robotically is just not the case.  It is seldom even read much less followed.

 

The first time I was set apart to serve as a bishopric counsellor, I was directed in my setting-apart blessing to become so familiar with the handbooks that I could be a 'living handbook' for our bishop. I've tried hard to live up to that charge from that moment. Our now-former bishop frequently points out that everything good that happened in our ward during his tenure (such as a doubling in sacrament meeting attendance) came directly from applying the directions in the handbooks. I guess all Latter-day Saints aren't renegades?

Edited November 24, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan

[busybee]

Our meetings were cut to 2 hours for several months while they were renovating our building. We have 4 wards using the building and not enough classrooms as it is, so when we lost 3 due to building works we had Sacrament Meeting and Priesthood/RS/YM/YW and a shortened Primary. I think in smaller units they have a 2 hour block as a rule.

Edited November 24, 2015 by busybee

[Buckeye]

It really becomes a question of how much in control local authorities feel.  Salt Lake is a long ways from Boston in a lot of ways.  Out here in the "mission field" there is less of a feeling of a centralized, cohesive church.  We have investigators pop in off the street who have just been going down the block visiting all the churches looking for one to go to.  They don't even know that "Mormons are different".  They are looking for a Praise Fellowship just like the one next door and start clapping after the music and wonder why everyone stares at them for doing so.

 

There is a feeling of isolation "out here" of circling the wagons, of being all alone in the wilderness without support, thousands of miles from church "civilization".  The differences are such that there is a feeling that "headquarters doesn't know how it really is in our neck of the woods and we gotta take care of our own".

 

When one is a bishop one feels like the "guy from the stake" is out to add more programs to his plate and make the bishop's life harder.  When one is a stake leader one wonders why these bishops refuse to follow directions.

 

I think it is less like that in Utah- I know we have discussed that jokingly, but I am convinced that the difference is real.  Driving downtown in your own city and seeing the Church Office Building tower and the SLC temple, and the Brigham Young house and monuments etc- in your back yard- I think just naturally gives one a clear notion of being at the center of a worldwide organization with central authority.

 

Out here in the boonies, you feel like Louis and Clark in the middle of no where, surrounded by the enemy waiting for a dispatch by telegraph that never comes while the secular "enemy" lurks behind every tree trying to lure away your members.  You want to keep them happy so they keep coming back, never thinking that "Headquarters" could possibly object to what you think needs to be done

 

I am convinced the psychology is really quite different "out here"

 

This resonates with me (I've lived "out here" my whole life except for my days at BYU). There are many disconnects between Utah and wards in the "mission field", but in my experience the biggest one is there difference in time/effort that is required to participate in church functions. A family can reasonably accommodate all the church programs when they live within walking distance of church, seminary is a release-time class, and there are enough members so that husbands and wives are not both given significant leadership positions at the same time. But when the chapel is an hour drive round-trip, dad is in the bishopric and mom is the YW president, and so forth, the build up of church programs can become overwhelming. Members and their local leaders are confronted with the constant decision of whether to let some programs slide (and if so, which ones) or push themselves to the breaking point where the gospel becomes drudgery. 

 

If I could have one principle implemented it would be this: no new programs unless the church first cuts something of lesser value (basically a balanced budget approach). As one example, my family values our ward choir greatly, but when the stake began adding new meetings for the youth - missionary training, find/take/teach, firesides in kirtland, etc.- we had to decide to cut other involvement, including choir, or face the reality of zero family time on Sundays.

[HappyJackWagon]

Putting aside the question of whether shortening the block is advisable, I'm wondering how a stake leadership could have gotten off the rails this badly. It's not as though we live in a time when communication with Church headquarters is difficult. And in a place like Boston they could be expected to be literate enough to read and comprehend a handbook.

Small branches sometimes reduce the overall block, shortening Sacrament meeting (maybe only having 1 speaker etc) and slightly shorter classes. So that isn't unheard of.

 

Didn't Otterson just make a big deal out of understanding the church handbook as a guideline and not hard fast rules? Didn't he indicate that local leaders could follow the spirit to address the needs of their members? Perhaps implementation of the handbook policies isn't as optional as he made it appear.

[Buckeye]

Small branches sometimes reduce the overall block, shortening Sacrament meeting (maybe only having 1 speaker etc) and slightly shorter classes. So that isn't unheard of.

 

Didn't Otterson just make a big deal out of understanding the church handbook as a guideline and not hard fast rules? Didn't he indicate that local leaders could follow the spirit to address the needs of their members? Perhaps implementation of the handbook policies isn't as optional as he made it appear.

 

Local leaders have discretion unless someone in their line of authority decides otherwise. It's that simple (and that complicated).

[HappyJackWagon]

Local leaders have discretion unless someone in their line of authority decides otherwise. It's that simple (and that complicated).

It's unfortunate this stake will miss out on this experiment. I'd volunteer to test out a 2 hour block.

[stemelbow]

It's unfortunate this stake will miss out on this experiment. I'd volunteer to test out a 2 hour block.

I've tested out a two hour meeting a few times. It works great for me. Just head on out before the third block and see hwo it goes next week.