Boring Sacrament Meeting - Revisited

[Scott Lloyd]

How so? Both sacrament meeting and the temple are centered around the performance of rites and ordinances. Are they different because we can pick when we want to go to the temple and we "have to" go to sacrament meeting every Sunday? How are they apples and oranges?

Our bishopric reminds us each week that the administration and partaking of the sacrament is "the reason for which we are here."

Gospel instruction, motivational sermons and hymn singing are enhancements to the experience, but we should never get the notion we go to be entertained. We attend so that we may remain "more perfectly unspotted from the world" (see Doctrine and Covenants 59).

Edited March 8, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

LOL @ Duncan & Buzzard!

P.S.: In a "How-do-we-enliven-Sacrament-meeting?" thread that was on here a few months ago, I chimed in with, "More Cheerios ™ and picture books! Any questions? "

What about those books that allow you to make pictures with Cheerios ™ and then eat them?

[Garden Girl]

What about those books that allow you to make pictures with Cheerios ™ and then eat them?

I could do that... satisfy my art leanings while stabilizing my blood sugar... yeah, thanks Cal...

GG

[Calm]

I could do that... satisfy my art leanings while stabilizing my blood sugar... yeah, thanks Cal...

GG

I am imagining you in church with your book and the kids peering over the pews in wistfulness....

[ERayR]

What about those books that allow you to make pictures with Cheerios ™ and then eat them?

What will they think off next?

[paulpatter]

At the risk of sounding too orthodox (and perhaps like an extremist), no sacrament meeting should be boring. Why? Because we have an opportunity to renew our covenants by partaking of the sacrament. There should be nothing boring about that.

[Garden Girl]

At the risk of sounding too orthodox (and perhaps like an extremist), no sacrament meeting should be boring. Why? Because we have an opportunity to renew our covenants by partaking of the sacrament. There should be nothing boring about that.

I don't think so either Paulpatter... but you'd be surprised about how many here say they are bored... I don't like to sound too orthodox either but I can always find a thought or two even from the most mundane speaker. I'm there to renew my covenants and feel the Spirit, and to renew my spirit... yes, what's boring about that?

GG

[Rivers]

At the risk of sounding too orthodox (and perhaps like an extremist), no sacrament meeting should be boring. Why? Because we have an opportunity to renew our covenants by partaking of the sacrament. There should be nothing boring about that.

I agree. But I think sacrament meeting could be shortened up a bit. I enjoy the sacrament meetings in hospitals and nursing homes. They sing the hymns, partake of the sacrament, one short talk, and maybe a musical number. The whole meeting is about 20 minutes. I easily get a sufficient spiritual boost from those meetings. The meeting's purpose is served. I wouldn't mind if all sacrament meetings were that short.

[Storm Rider]

Many comments have been provided, but the fact remains that too often our most sacred meetings turns into time of trite, repetitive, mindless yammerings on topics that each member of the congregation could repeat or talk on without any preparation. I recognize that is too strongly stated, but the fact remains that our bishops too often rely on recommendations without seldom an attempt to follow the Spirit. Wards are living organisms that need special attention that is often unique from the another ward. We need to feel that pulse and be able to respond to it and encouraged to do so. I am not supporting the time of willy-nilly formats that occurred I the Catholic Church after Vatican II, but at least an understanding that there is not one way to do this. Sacrament meeting is about a focus on the Savior, his body and blood sacrificed for us as individuals and as a group of his followers, that we openly are willing to take upon us his name and renew our covenant with him. Yes, we get out of it what we put into it, but lets not brush the mediocrity of our meetings under the proverbial rug simply because it makes us uncomfortable or because it demands more effort.

[why me]

I think that sacrament meetings haven't changed much but people have. True, they are not very entertaining or charismatic. But then again, we have ordinary people doing their best to speak in public about a topic that has been given to them or that they chose themselves. True, they are by and large not joyce meyers or some other flamboyant speaker but they are human beings trying to do their best in a world that demands entertainment.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I could use a good deal more worship and celebrations.

Been to none where worship was not taking place; define "celebrations"? I grew up in a world of shouting and "celebrations"...no one spoke of missionary work. The scriptures are clear that worship is a private issue to be done via the Holy Spirit which is a "refining Spirit", a "still small voice". Edited March 9, 2013 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[why me]

I don't think so either Paulpatter... but you'd be surprised about how many here say they are bored... I don't like to sound too orthodox either but I can always find a thought or two even from the most mundane speaker. I'm there to renew my covenants and feel the Spirit, and to renew my spirit... yes, what's boring about that?

GG

Nothing. But people these days need excitement. They need to be enthralled with the message. I do think that the attention span of people has suffered over the years. Mass entertainment and the internet can do this people: lower their concentration if there is no bedazzling going on.

But you are right. It is about feeling the spirit and renewing the spirit. I tend to give people a break when they are speaking. I know that they are not pros in doing it but they are trying to do their best.

[paulpatter]

I don't think so either Paulpatter... but you'd be surprised about how many here say they are bored... I don't like to sound too orthodox either but I can always find a thought or two even from the most mundane speaker. I'm there to renew my covenants and feel the Spirit, and to renew my spirit... yes, what's boring about that?

GG

Obviously, I couldn't agree more, Garden Girl. Thank you.

The following story may be of interest. A close friend of mine lived in the same ward as President McKay. He told me that on several occasions during the passing of the sacrament, President McKay, with his head bowed, would have tears streaming down his face. I've never forgotten that story, and I think it puts the importance of sacrament meeting into perspective.

[Bikeemikey]

I revisit boring sacrament meeting weekly... nothing new there.

I still enjoy going though.

[cinepro]

If the author in the OP was impressed by that change-up in format, I hope she's taken her blood pressure medication when the Primary Program rolls around.

[Bikeemikey]

If the author in the OP was impressed by that change-up in format, I hope she's taken her blood pressure medication when the Primary Program rolls around.

Speaking of being impressed by shake ups... It was interesting to me the way the missionary age was announced at general conference and people thought the second coming was going on outside... compared to the new edition of our Scriptures that was rolled out online with little fanfare and a much smaller group of people are aware of it... though it is about 1 billion times more important.

There is so much structure in our religious format that an age change in missionary enrolment gives us goose bumps but a reinvention of the Book of Abraham gets a yawn; isn't this kind of distressing?

[Duncan]

Speaking of being impressed by shake ups... It was interesting to me the way the missionary age was announced at general conference and people thought the second coming was going on outside... compared to the new edition of our Scriptures that was rolled out online with little fanfare and a much smaller group of people are aware of it... though it is about 1 billion times more important.

There is so much structure in our religious format that an age change in missionary enrolment gives us goose bumps but a reinvention of the Book of Abraham gets a yawn; isn't this kind of distressing?

I agree with you

[Bikeemikey]

I agree with you

Sweet... that hardly ever happens to me...

[Stone holm]

Hello Smac...

I get distressed at those who find Sacrament meetings so boring... I agree not only does it depend upon the Bishop but more importantly, upon us. I am fortunate to be in a ward that has mostly wonderful sac mtgs... but when a speaker is what might be considered mundane, I try to listen even more because usually there are gems contained in the talk... we include special musical numbers, etc.

Smac, was this placed in a venue that provided for comments or opposing remarks? I hope so... IMO people like Ms. Reiss really don't get it themselves and can do harm actually in that someone who might have been curious to attend a Mormon meeting would be put off...

GG

Oh my goodness, I get so tired of the investigator argument. Face it that is why the Sacrament and Conferences are so boring in the first place, we rarely can discuss anything interesting for fear of turning off some investigator, so instead of Pres. Hinckley saying yep that's our doctrine, God really was once like us, he has to say, oh well we don't emphasize that much and we don't really talk about that much. Well of course we don't we are so afraid of the Evangelicals taking pot shots at us. We put out class manuals that are guaranteed to glaze over anybody with more than two brain cells. No sorry, they'll just have to be offended as we are losing people with lethal doses of pure boredom.

[cinepro]

There is so much structure in our religious format that an age change in missionary enrolment gives us goose bumps but a reinvention of the Book of Abraham gets a yawn; isn't this kind of distressing?

I'm assuming most people react in direct proportion to the degree to which "news" relates to them. For most Church members, a change in the missionary age very much relates to the lives of themselves, friends and/or family, in a big way.

The change to the introduction to the Book of Abraham (and not even the actual text)...not so much.

Edited March 12, 2013 by cinepro

[Calm]

Oh my goodness, I get so tired of the investigator argument. Face it that is why the Sacrament and Conferences are so boring in the first place, we rarely can discuss anything interesting for fear of turning off some investigator,

That was not her point, her point was she hoped the blogger's comments wouldn't put off an investigator from attending, not that what went on in a SM would.

MO people like Ms. Reiss really don't get it themselves and can do harm actually in that someone who might have been curious to attend a Mormon meeting would be put off...

[Stone holm]

I think that sacrament meetings haven't changed much but people have. True, they are not very entertaining or charismatic. But then again, we have ordinary people doing their best to speak in public about a topic that has been given to them or that they chose themselves. True, they are by and large not joyce meyers or some other flamboyant speaker but they are human beings trying to do their best in a world that demands entertainment.

I think they have changed. They have been dumbed down like the manuals for the classes. And frequently consist of trite professions of belief that are edifying to the average first grader, unfortunately most of them are busy eating Cheerios. Have you ever compared the Conference talks recorded in the Journal of Discourses compared to the pablum fed out today? I almost prefer it when some fundamentalist wacko goes off the rails than the glossy nothingness that often prevails.

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm assuming most people react in direct proportion to the degree to which "news" relates to them. For most Church members, a change in the missionary age very much relates to the lives of themselves, friends and/or family, in a big way.

The change to the introduction to the Book of Abraham (and not even the actual text)...not so much.

I agree with this, and would add that the implications of the new edition of the scriptures (attended by histrionics such as "a reinvention of the Book of Abraham") have been highly overrated in some quarters, including fora such as this discussion board. Much of what is being identified as new has in actuality been in place for years in on-line versions of the scriptures. The bulk of it is merely mechanical alteration, such as changes in the spelling of words. Beyond that, it's merely a matter of changing some of the study aids, such as chapter headers, which have never been recognized as canonical to begin with and which now only reflect more accurate understanding that has come about not suddenly but incrementally over time.

For example, knowledgeable Latter-day Saints have understood for a long time now that the reference to "Nephite coinage" in one of the chapter headers was inaccurately stated, and in the on-line version, that was corrected quite a while ago to read "Nephite monetary system."

So I say: Big whoop. Edited March 17, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Stone holm]

Speaking of being impressed by shake ups... It was interesting to me the way the missionary age was announced at general conference and people thought the second coming was going on outside... compared to the new edition of our Scriptures that was rolled out online with little fanfare and a much smaller group of people are aware of it... though it is about 1 billion times more important.

There is so much structure in our religious format that an age change in missionary enrolment gives us goose bumps but a reinvention of the Book of Abraham gets a yawn; isn't this kind of distressing?

Yeah well that assumes that most people had ever read the headings in the first place. Missionaries though that is something everybody knows something about and has an opinion on. Heck they could put in the headings that Yoda was an inspired personage and unless a teacher or someone pointed it out 90% of the Church would never know it, and if they were asked for a sustaining vote those hands would shoot up like rockets. Shoot I bit we could put up Tom the Toad for Asst. Bathroom usher and he would get a sustaining vote and you think they care if the headings get tweaked?