Shorten Sunday Block Of Meetings?

[Messenger]

Just out of curiosity… has anyone else heard of or in favor of further shortening the Sunday block of meetings? I seem to remember hearing some rumors (which is probably all they are) that Church HQ had considered a shorter meeting schedule, something along the lines of a 45 min sacrament and 30 min each for Sunday school and priesthood / relief society.

I think its great if they are considering it. Personally, I think sacrament meeting is too long, but I always have a hard time sitting still for more than 30 minutes anyways. I usually enjoy the lessons in High Priest Group. The problem is that its not long enough in my mind. Gospel Doctrine is too long as well - shorter would be nice. Nearly every high priest group meeting I have been to is pretty over-active on participation and we teachers have a heck of a time trying to get the main point of the lesson out by the time we get finished. Part of the problem is that the darn priesthood starting session can drag on and on sometimes only leaving 15 to 20 minutes left for the lesson. Good luck with that! LOL Personally, I'd love to see sacrament meeting down to only a half hour.

Mark

[LeSellers]

Both are needed: the speaker-congregation arrangement of sacrament meeting and the less-formal classroom setting with focused and moderated interaction between teacher, student, and other students "that all may be edified of all" (see Doctrine and Covenants 88:122). In fact, it's the latter that seems most closely consistent with the phrasing "speak one with another".

Priesthood Meeting is the one I've covenanted to attend. I speak to my brethren there. We edify each other nicely, thank you.

We read that the presidents of quorums are to meet with their brethren and teach them thier duty. I don't see any such commandment for Sunday School.

If you're among those who are out in the foyer sluffing Sunday School class, no wonder you don't see value in it.

I'm in the classroom every Sunday, and have never (not even when I could have justified it while tending our sometimes disruptive children) sat in the foyer.

Further, I have not said I find no value in it (even though I said it was "useless", I meant that I haven't learned anything new there in many years—it's not the same thing). I just don't find it the best use of Sabbath time.

Lehi

Edited February 26, 2012 by LeSellers

[Wants2know]

Personally, I love the "block". I enjoy everything about Sunday. The only thing that could make it better is if the talks were somehow sent through the system into the nursery room if I need to leave with my unruly almost 3 year old. Yes it's a big piece of time, and I had a hard time getting used to it and "giving up" my lazy Sundays, but I have grown to thoroughly enjoy the fellowship, and it is the EXCEPTION that I have a Sunday where I am not edified by a speaker. Most Sundays I find it hard to leave because where else can I be surrounded by people who want to talk about the gospel and how to use it in everyday life? I have found that as I've become more of a member of the church, I plan my weeks more efficiently so that I can focus on my family and the gospel on Sundays, and what a blessing this has been - to have one day of the week where I know that I'm not going to stress about dinner and cleaning and work and just let myself envelop the gospel. Never thought I'd be the one saying this….

[Garden Girl]

Personally, I love the "block". I enjoy everything about Sunday. The only thing that could make it better is if the talks were somehow sent through the system into the nursery room if I need to leave with my unruly almost 3 year old. Yes it's a big piece of time, and I had a hard time getting used to it and "giving up" my lazy Sundays, but I have grown to thoroughly enjoy the fellowship, and it is the EXCEPTION that I have a Sunday where I am not edified by a speaker. Most Sundays I find it hard to leave because where else can I be surrounded by people who want to talk about the gospel and how to use it in everyday life? I have found that as I've become more of a member of the church, I plan my weeks more efficiently so that I can focus on my family and the gospel on Sundays, and what a blessing this has been - to have one day of the week where I know that I'm not going to stress about dinner and cleaning and work and just let myself envelop the gospel. Never thought I'd be the one saying this….

Hello W2K...

I can't tell you how happy it makes me to read your post... I'm so glad you, particularly as a convert, feel the way you have expressed.

Hope all is well...

GG

[Scott Lloyd]

I don't remember but I am a bit older than 50. Probably mid 1950's.

It was far earlier than that; see the prior post by calmoriah.

[Scott Lloyd]

Priesthood Meeting is the one I've covenanted to attend. I speak to my brethren there. We edify each other nicely, thank you.

We read that the presidents of quorums are to meet with their brethren and teach them thier duty. I don't see any such commandment for Sunday School.

As a Latter-day Saint, you have covenanted far more than that, including sustaining those who are in authority in the Church and those who have been called to teach and lead in its auxiliary organizations. Currently, that includes attendance at and participation in Sunday School class.

I note that you say you are doing that already. That is commendable. The good news is that obedience to inspired direction need not be considered a waste of time.

I'm in the classroom every Sunday, and have never (not even when I could have justified it while tending our sometimes disruptive children) sat in the foyer.

Commendable. See above.

Further, I have not said I find no value in it (even though I said it was "useless", I meant that I haven't learned anything new there in many years—it's not the same thing). I just don't find it the best use of Sabbath time.

I have learned to recognize that the time I spend in Sunday School class is worthwhile whether or not I happen to be learning anything new at the moment. If I can contribute to the learning, edification and motivation of others — either as a teacher or a fellow class member — it is time well spent and, I earnestly believe — pleasing to God.

Edited February 27, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[LeSellers]

the time I spend in Sunday School class is worthwhile whether or not I happen to be learning anything new at the moment. If I can contribute to the learning, edification and motivation of others — either as a teacher or a fellow class member — it is time well spent and, I earnestly believe — pleasing to God.

Which I do not reject. What I am saying is that there are better ways to use that time, and, whether or not anyone believes it, Sunday School is not a required meeting. If I attend Sacrament Meetings and my Priesthood Meetings, I am fully in compliance with the laws of the Sabbath.

It seems odd to me that the most important part of Sunday School, the "Practice Hymn" is the part we don't have any more. I'm no singer: our daughters got all of their musical talent from me, and left me with none. (Fortunately, my Jacquie was stingy with hers, and still sings as well as ever she did.) Still, I have memorized the words to something like 95 of the Hymns in the hymnal. But our Ward Music Chair has determined that we're going to sing unknown hymns at least once a Sacrament Meeting, so our hymns sound more than merely lamentable: they're flat out bad! Bad and unsung by most.

Wazzup widdat?

The lesson material in Sunday School is, by design, a deep exploration of the trite. I appreciate the need for that: all of us Saints are stiff-necked, and we need the repetition: and half of us know no prophet but Gordon B. Hinkely and Thomas S. Monson; finally, most of us don't read the scriptures nearly as well as we should and know almost nothing except what we hear in Sunday School. So, for the newbies and the oldbies, the recurrent, four-year plan is a necessity.

However, Priesthood Meeting, for the brethren, and Relief Society Meeting, for the sisters, have a viable option almost no one really uses (in my experience): once a month, the quorum/society president has some latitude in choosing the lesson topic and material. Those meetings, among us High Priests, are the ones that are the most useful, with the most participation. I believe they were when I was the Elders' Quorum president with its younger cohorts, so it might not be a stretch to claim that Relief Society (consisting of a wider range of ages in its membership) would have a similar response.

Further, even if Sunday School were given a wider charter, the current schedule just does not allow any depth to a discussion. Shortening Priesthood Meeting is not reasonable: it's where the business of the ward is planned (or should be), so a lesson there must be flexible to respect the time allotted (which varies from 20~45 minutes as circumstances change). If those lost 40 minutes in Sunday School were shifted to the Priesthood, Young Women, and Relief Society, under the direction of the local president/cy, I believe much more value would result as the presidents "teach them their duty" (which is, sadly, rarely the case in either Aaronic Priesthood or Young Women's—it's no advantage to a teenager when the adults actively interfere with the presidents' fulfilling their God-commanded responsibilities).

As one more benefit: each ward would have at least nine more people to fill callings. With Primary now, essentially, requiring dual teachers whenever a brother is called to serve, that's no trivial gift.

Lehi

[Scott Lloyd]

... and, whether or not anyone believes it, Sunday School is not a required meeting. If I attend Sacrament Meetings and my Priesthood Meetings, I am fully in compliance with the laws of the Sabbath.

I'll have to issue a CFR on that. I recognize the difficulty of proving a negative, but it is your assertion, which I don't believe you can persuasively sustain short of presenting an authoritative list of required Sabbath meetings from which Sunday School is absent.

Add on: While you're searching for that reference, you might want to consider this snippet from a Q and A on the Church website lds.org:

4. Why are attendance rolls taken in Sunday School if attendance is not reported on the Member Progress Report?

Answer: Class rolls should be taken to determine who is not attending. "The secretary reviews attendance records with the Sunday School presidency, focusing on members who are not attending or are attending irregularly" (Church Handbook of Instructions, Book 2, 242). The Sunday School president, who is a member of the ward council, may discuss at ward council ways that these non-attending members may be fellowshipped and invited to return to full activity and which person or group should take the lead in initiating contact.

If, as you imply, attendance at Sunday School is optional, it seems odd to me that the ward council would be directed to "fellowship" those who do not attend or attend irregularly.

Edited February 27, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Saints Alive]

I'll have to issue a CFR on that. I recognize the difficulty of proving a negative, but it is your assertion, which I don't believe you can persuasively sustain short of presenting an authoritative list of required Sabbath meetings from which Sunday School is absent.

Add on: While you're searching for that reference, you might want to consider this snippet from a Q and A on the Church website lds.org:

If, as you imply, attendance at Sunday School is optional, it seems odd to me that the ward council would be directed to "fellowship" those who do not attend or attend irregularly.

I believe that is because very few exercise the option of skipping just sunday school. generally, those who come either leave after sacrament or stay the whole time.

on a side note: I was once in a ward that did a reverse schedule (i.e. priesthood, sunday school, and then Sacrament) it was interesting that the parking lot was always rather empty in the morning but completely full after Sacrament.

[LeSellers]

I'll have to issue a CFR on that. I recognize the difficulty of proving a negative, but it is your assertion, which I don't believe you can persuasively sustain short of presenting an authoritative list of required Sabbath meetings from which Sunday School is absent.

Well, you can take the responsibility of providing a statement supporting your positive claim that Sunday School is a required meeting. It's not in the scriptures, as Priesthood Meeting is, that's fer shure.

Yes, we are all encouraged to attend Sunday School, but I have never seen a place where the Lord, personally or through His servants, has told us that we must attend that meeting.

Lehi

[silvermoon383]

on a side note: I was once in a ward that did a reverse schedule (i.e. priesthood, sunday school, and then Sacrament) it was interesting that the parking lot was always rather empty in the morning but completely full after Sacrament.

My 1st YSA branch after my mission did that specifically for this reason. The stake took every excuse possible and made sure they weren't an issue (starting at 1 with priesthood/RS, ending with sacrament.) It made for an interesting first Sunday for me at the YSA branch when I left for college. They did the usual order, but started at 2 so when Sacrament meeting ended just after 3 I almost went home, used to that being the end of the day. XD

Edited February 28, 2012 by silvermoon383

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, you can take the responsibility of providing a statement supporting your positive claim that Sunday School is a required meeting. It's not in the scriptures, as Priesthood Meeting is, that's fer shure.

Yes, we are all encouraged to attend Sunday School, but I have never seen a place where the Lord, personally or through His servants, has told us that we must attend that meeting.

Lehi

I take it that you have nothing indicating it is optional then, similar in stature to, say, playing ward basketball or signing up to purchase food storage products in bulk.

As I've already said, the fact that the ward council is encouraged to make efforts to "fellowship" non-attenders and irregular attenders says a great deal to me.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Post made in error.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[LeSellers]

I take it that you have nothing indicating it is optional

I haven't looked. Why should I? As you said, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden is on you.

As I've already said, the fact that the ward council is encouraged to make efforts to "fellowship" non-attenders and irregular attenders says a great deal to me.

As it does to me. However, that does not make Sunday School a required meeting.

Lehi

[Scott Lloyd]

I haven't looked. Why should I? As you said, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden is on you.

Nonsense. The burden is on him who makes the assertion. And on him who contradicts conventional wisdom, as you are doing when you assert that attendance at a portion of the standard three-hour block of sabbath worship services is not a requirement.

As it does to me. However, that does not make Sunday School a required meeting.

Apparently you are a target for reactivation efforts if you skip it habitually.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[LeSellers]

The burden is on him who makes the assertion.

The burden is on him who makes the positive assertion. You cannot prove a negative. Or, as Hermione Granger asked when Xeno Lovegood asserted that there was a "Resurrection Stone": "Do you expect me to examine every pebble on earth?"

You made the positive assertion that Sunday School is a required meeting. Demonstrate that it is.

Apparently you are a target for reactivation efforts if you skip it habitually.

That would be odd if the Saint in question was in attendance at both Sacrament Meeting and Priesthood (or Relief Society) Meeting the same weeks he was absent from Sunday School.

Lehi

I did not write that.

Lehi

[Scott Lloyd]

The burden is on him who makes the positive assertion.

Go back and read my post as it appeared after I added to it. By asserting that it is not a required meeting you contradict a conventional wisdom, and that calls for evidence.

You cannot prove a negative. Or, as Hermione Granger asked when Xeno Lovegood asserted that there was a "Resurrection Stone": "Do you expect me to examine every pebble on earth?"

I recognize you're up against a difficulty. Good luck. Or you could just acknowledge that you invented it out of whole cloth.

That would be odd if the Saint in question was in attendance at both Sacrament Meeting and Priesthood (or Relief Society) Meeting the same weeks he was absent from Sunday School.

I don't see where the handbook draws that distinction when it talks about reaching out to those who absent themselves from Sunday School.

I did not write that.

Yes you did. I just forgot to delete it.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

For Lehi:

The following is from the Sunday School page on the Church website:

Introduction to Sunday School

The Prophet Joseph Smith said, “It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance” (D&C 131:6). The Lord has also revealed to us through the Prophet Joseph Smith that "the glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth” (D&C 93:36). Regular attendance at Sunday School helps us fulfill these promises and come closer to the Savior and Heavenly Father.

Sunday School is for all Church members and interested friends of other faiths ages 12 and older. Its purposes are to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ and strengthen individuals and families by encouraging them to study the scriptures, obey the commandments, receive the essential ordinances, and keep the associated covenants.

(Bold emphasis mine)

The explicit message here is that Sunday School is for everybody over 12, and the clear implication is that Sunday School is an appointed means to fulfill the goals in the opening paragraph above. Ergo, to be casual in one's attitude about it is to risk missing out on the promised blessings.

(By the way, the inclusion of the art above was unintentional, but it looks nice, so I kept it.)

Edited February 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[LeSellers]

The following is from the Sunday School page on the Church website:

Introduction to Sunday School

... Sunday School is for all Church members and interested friends of other faiths ages 12 and older. ...

(Bold emphasis mine)

The explicit message here is that Sunday School is for everybody over 12, and the clear implication is that Sunday School is an appointed means to fulfill the goals in the opening paragraph above. Ergo, to be casual in one's attitude about it is to risk missing out on the promised blessings.

Yes, it is for everybody over 12. However, it we take your position, those of other faiths are also required to attend, which is plainly not the case.

The phrase "is for all Church members" could mean that all of us must attend. As I read it, however, it means only that it was designed for those over 12.

Your charge, that I made this up out of whole cloth implies, nay states, that I am lying. I am not. You have not given me any reason to change my mind on the matter, and it is you who asserted that Sunday School is a required.

Lehi

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes, it is for everybody over 12. However, it we take your position, those of other faiths are also required to attend, which is plainly not the case.

Um, no. The phrasing is "interested friends of other faiths." And there is no such qualifier given for Church members. One would hope they would be interested in Sunday School, but the apparent implication is they should attend in any case.

The phrase "is for all Church members" could mean that all of us must attend. As I read it, however, it means only that it was designed for those over 12.

Your charge, that I made this up out of whole cloth implies, nay states, that I am lying. I am not. You have not given me any reason to change my mind on the matter, and it is you who asserted that Sunday School is a required.

I hardly know what to say to you at this point. Clearly, the intent is that everybody over 12 attend Sunday School (unless they have a conflicting assignment, such as teaching Primary). When you get right down to it, virtually nothing we do in the Church is required. That is, we have our moral agency. But if we want the associated blessings, we try to comport our behavior with the mind and will of God, and we sustain His servants.

(By the way, the "whole cloth" aside was meant as good-natured teasing.)

Edited February 29, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Saints Alive]

Scott Loyd: I think what LeSellers is getting at (correct me if I am wrong) is that no where does it say "thou Shalt attend sunday school" while we are commanded to attend Priesthood. I am not saying that that is the right or wrong interpretation but it is a valid one.

[The Nehor]

You made the positive assertion that Sunday School is a required meeting. Demonstrate that it is.

We are told to sustain and obey those who hold Priesthood Keys. Those who hold Priesthood keys have created auxiliary organizations to help the Priesthood do its job. One of those is the Sunday School. It is part of our Priesthood duty to support and sustain all the auxiliary organizations.

If you sustain the Prophet as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and he also continues to maintain, support, and direct the Sunday School auxiliary organization then attendance of the Sunday School class which you should attend is a matter of obedience.

[Scott Lloyd]

We are told to sustain and obey those who hold Priesthood Keys. Those who hold Priesthood keys have created auxiliary organizations to help the Priesthood do its job. One of those is the Sunday School. It is part of our Priesthood duty to support and sustain all the auxiliary organizations.

If you sustain the Prophet as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and he also continues to maintain, support, and direct the Sunday School auxiliary organization then attendance of the Sunday School class which you should attend is a matter of obedience.

This is certainly consistent with Handbook 2: Administering the Church , which states:

Sunday School

The Sunday School is an auxiliary to the priesthood. All auxiliaries exist to help Church members grow in their testimonies of Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the restored gospel. Through the work of the auxiliaries, members receive instruction, encouragement, and support as they strive to live according to gospel principles. (D&C 88:77) at church and at home.

12.1 Purposes of Sunday School

All Church members ages 12 and older are members of Sunday School. Those of other faiths are also welcome to attend and participate in Sunday School classes. The purposes of the Sunday School organization are to:

1. 
   Strengthen individuals’ and families’ faith in Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ through teaching, learning, and fellowshipping.
   
2. 
   Help Church members “teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom” (D&C 88:77) at church and at home
   

1. 
   

I have bolded portions of the above that seem especially relevant to the discussion at hand.

Lehi (LeSellers) has spoken of the purpose of priesthood meeting being to conduct the "business of the ward." Certainly much of the business of the ward (especially purposes 1 and 2 listed above) is accomplished in and through the Sunday School and the other auxiliaries, which, as auxiliaries to the priesthood, function under priesthood direction.

Edited February 29, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Scott Loyd: I think what LeSellers is getting at (correct me if I am wrong) is that no where does it say "thou Shalt attend sunday school" while we are commanded to attend Priesthood. I am not saying that that is the right or wrong interpretation but it is a valid one.

I get his meaning.

To interpret the scriptures as saying that Sunday School attendance is optional merely because the scriptures do not contain the phrase "Sunday school" is an argument from silence and strikes me as unduly literalistic. It is not unlike the sectarian contention that because a Mormon teaching is not in the Bible it is not of God. Much of what we do in the Church amounts to inspired application of scriptural fundamentals by those who are in authority and acting under revelation to make such application. We don't see the words "tea" or "coffee" in scripture, yet they are so strictly forbidden under the authoritative application of the Word of Wisdom that their use deprives one of the privilege to attend the temple.

As I recall, James E. Talmage, in the book "Articles of Faith," (and it has been years since I've read it) identified the "helps and governments" mentioned in Doctrine and Covenants 124:143 as pertaining to the auxiliaries of the Church, which would include Sunday School. Surely the need and purposes for Sunday School identified in the Church handbook will always be with us. To promote the notion that Sunday School attendance is optional would hinder the priesthood in its efforts to fulfill that need and those purposes, I fear.

Edited February 29, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Saints Alive]

For the record I am not taking a side on Sunday School being mandatory or not. However your word of wisdom example isn't completely analogous because "hot drinks" was later clarified by modern revelation to mean tea and coffee and D&C specifically prohibits "hot drinks" D&C 124 does not specifically instruct members to attend "helps and governments" it just says that they are given for the bishops use.