What Is A Priesthood Meeting?

[CV75]

In the temple recommend meeting the guys are asked if you attend your Priesthood meetings, What is a Priesthood meeting exactley? They have that stake Priesthood mtg once a year and I can't see that constituting the one thing that will get you a recommend. Then I thought well, what about EQ or High Priests, but then again their are brethren that attend young mens or primary or do whatever, but then again in any of those classes we don't do anything with the Priesthood but simply listen or teach but that isn't exercising the priesthood.

 What about sacrament mtg? but only a handful of brethren are exercising the priesthood, but what about those who don't?

if we as  priesthood holders attend any meeting is that a priesthood meeting as someone with the priesthood is there?.

 

is a meeting of the Priesthood perhaps? but the Priesthood isn't men, it's Gods power

 

 Is there such a thing as a priesthood meeting?

The next time you're asked, ask! But I think the question is really about sacarment and other obligatory meetings in general. This would cover the auxiliary meetings including those where men are not attending their quorum or group meetings to instruct otehr classes or otherwise particpate as invited/assigned. That way men and women can answer the same question at the same standard regardless of what priesthood office or quorum they belong to. As you pointed out, I think the question could be construed to cover any meeting (one that is presided over) and where Priesthood Power is evident, which I think my explanation covers.

 

Of course we all know that the common use of the name "priesthood meeting"  refers to such things as quorum and preisthood leadership meetings, and others formally set up by the chain of leadership for priesthood holders to gather. But the temple recommend question is much broader than that, and appropriately so!

Edited October 15, 2013 by CV75

[CV75]

it's funny too when you are asked if you wear the garments as instructed, well my Mum was told something totally different than I was! All I was told was not to throw them on the floor when showering or bathing or something! haha! That's the thing like Priesthood meeting I am trying to figure out what that is, "other meetings" is clear and concise!

These instructions are generally reviewed with each temple recommend interview.

[Duncan]

So it's a different set of questions for women than for men? That does sound suspect.

 

 

A woman needs to chime in on that respect!

[cinepro]

So it's a different set of questions for women than for men? That does sound suspect.

 

Well, I know one way to solve that problem...        

[wenglund]

I am guessing they don't get asked this question, maybe just the do you attend your meetings?

 

So, either it isn't a standard question, or there are different standard questions for men and women. I am thinking it is the former. If so, then you are likely being asked a question that has been revised and personalized by your local leaders.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Tacenda]

"The garment is sacred and should be treated with respect at all times. Garments should be kept off the floor. They should also be kept clean and mended. After garments are washed, they should not be hung in public areas to dry. Nor should they be displayed or exposed to the view of people who do not understand their significance."

Handbook 2, 21.1.42, 6th paragraph (mothers are always right!)

How come men are allowed to wear crew neck that show? My husband wears that style, and a lot of times his garments turn gray and get nubbies. He struggles with wearing the big round style that shows on the side and looks odd, therefore the crewneck. But I'm continually buying new tops because after a few washings they look old and worn, grrrrr!

[Duncan]

How come men are allowed to wear crew neck that show? My husband wears that style, and a lot of times his garments turn gray and get nubbies. He struggles with wearing the big round style that shows on the side and looks odd, therefore the crewneck. But I'm continually buying new tops because after a few washings they look old and worn, grrrrr!

 

 

I wear the happy face ones, and I don't use bleach on them, try that!

[Stargazer]

I've never been in a bishopric or stake presidency. I'm guessing there is some leeway for divine inspiration in how the questions are posed.

 

On the other hand, I've heard of cautions being issued that the standard temple recommend questions should not be added to or altered. So I don't know what to say about this.

 

No there isn't any bloody leeway.  The questions are supposed to be asked exactly as printed in the recommend book, without any private additions.  This is a policy not a nicety.  The reason for it is because in the past there have been bishops who got really creative and used temple recommends to promote private doctrine and get into peoples lives in ways they're not supposed to.

[cinepro]

How come men are allowed to wear crew neck that show? My husband wears that style, and a lot of times his garments turn gray and get nubbies. He struggles with wearing the big round style that shows on the side and looks odd, therefore the crewneck. But I'm continually buying new tops because after a few washings they look old and worn, grrrrr!

 

It's the symbols that can't be shown to others.  There is nothing sacred or secret about the neck of a white T-shirt.

 

So you don't have to worry about the Danites getting your husband.  But the fashion police might.

[ksfisher]

 

It's the symbols that can't be shown to others.  There is nothing sacred or secret about the neck of a white T-shirt.

 

So you don't have to worry about the Danites getting your husband.  But the fashion police might.

 

The instructions in the handbook don't differentiate between the part of the garment with the symbols and the parts without.  All is considered part of the garment.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

I've conducted dozens of temple recommend interviews the past 19 months, and Duncan is right. The question (no distinction between men and women) asks if people attend their 'sacrament and priesthood meetings'. And I'm not using old questions; we were sent an update to the questions since I've been serving, and these are the words.

[Scott Lloyd]

I've conducted dozens of temple recommend interviews the past 19 months, and Duncan is right. The question (no distinction between men and women) asks if people attend their 'sacrament and priesthood meetings'. And I'm not using old questions; we were sent an update to the questions since I've been serving, and these are the words.

Here's the FairMormon Wiki entry.  It has "sacrament and other meetings." Is it outdated? (Wiki Wonka, if you're reading, take note.)

 

Edited to add:

 

I just asked a currently serving bishop who works in the cubicle next to me. He corroborates what Hamba Tuhan has said here, except that he is fairly young, hasn't been serving for very long, and doesn't recall the earlier version in which the question said "sacrament and other meetings."

 

Yet we have documented here that the question formerly read that way. I wonder why it was changed. And does it excuse people from attending other meetings, such as Sunday School, stake conference, etc.?

Edited October 16, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Hamba Tuhan]

It has "sacrament and other meetings." Is it outdated?

 

I've only been at this, as I noted, for 19 months, but it's been 'sacrament and priesthood meetings' throughout that short time. Before that, I honestly can't recall what people asked me.

[Scott Lloyd]

I've only been at this, as I noted, for 19 months, but it's been 'sacrament and priesthood meetings' throughout that short time. Before that, I honestly can't recall what people asked me.

OK.

 

Please see the addendum to my post above.

[Scott Lloyd]

I've only been at this, as I noted, for 19 months, but it's been 'sacrament and priesthood meetings' throughout that short time. Before that, I honestly can't recall what people asked me.

What do you do with women? Do you ask about Relief Society attendance in place of priesthood meeting? Or do  you just ask the women about sacrament meeting attendance?

[Nevo]

.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Nevo

[ERMD]

I've been conducting temple recommend interviews for over 3 years.  The question during that time has always been written "sacrament and priesthood meetings."

 

When interviewing sisters, I leave out "priesthood meetings."

 

I think some leeway can be given with  specific questions.  For example, when I interview youth for limited-use recommends, I do not ask them, "Do you have any financial or other obligations to a former spouse or children?"

 

I think the intent of the question is directed toward regular priesthood meeting/auxiliary meeting attendance.  Of course, if an individual has a calling that involves teaching youth or primary children during that hour, then that individual is attending and serving.  Good enough for me.

Edited October 16, 2013 by ERMD

[rongo]

I've never been in a bishopric or stake presidency. I'm guessing there is some leeway for divine inspiration in how the questions are posed.

 

On the other hand, I've heard of cautions being issued that the standard temple recommend questions should not be added to or altered. So I don't know what to say about this.

My stake president was specifically told by a member of the Seventy not to alter the wording in any way. He had been changing the wording of "do you . . . attend your sacrament and priesthood meetings . . ." (that is the exact wording, by the way --- every member should be asked that) to ". . . priesthood or Relief Society meetings . . ." He was told in no uncertain terms that the women are to be asked that as well as the men, because we don't change any of the words in any way.

[Hamba Tuhan]

What do you do with women? Do you ask about Relief Society attendance in place of priesthood meeting? Or do  you just ask the women about sacrament meeting attendance?

 

Lacking instructions to somehow adjust the question for women, I just ask the question as written. Not once has a female queried me about it. On a personal level, I've come to assume that 'priesthood meetings' include all meetings convened under the authority of the priesthood, but I'm happy if there's a better answer.

 

(FWIW, I also ask deacons if they have a former spouse or children. I know they don't, but I've not been instructed not to, and I don't think it can hurt for them to know that the Church expects men to be responsible in their personal relationships.)

Edited October 16, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[rpn]

The stake priesthood meeting IS a priesthood meeting, as is the HP Group meeting held once a year, often in the form of a dinner with spouses.

[Scott Lloyd]

I've been conducting temple recommend interviews for over 3 years.  The question during that time has always been written "sacrament and priesthood meetings."

 

Then I have to wonder, again, where the FairMormon wiki got the wording in its entry.

 

Wiki Wonka, if you're reading this, is the source for that entry really more than three years old?

 

(It's possible, I suppose, that the entry will now be changed. If that should happen, let me attest that at the time I wrote this post, it still read "sacrament and other meetings.")

Edited October 16, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[rongo]

 

Lacking instructions to somehow adjust the question for women, I just ask the question as written. Not once has a female queried me about it.

Ditto. In ca. eight years of serving in three bishoprics, I asked all women "do you . . . attend your sacrament and priesthood meetings . . ." Not one batted an eye or asked for clarification or follow-up. I know both men and women are supposed to be asked this, though.

 

The one I got the most confused looks about was "Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church . . ." This did lead to follow-up questions and discussion about what this is referring to.

 

ERMD wrote: "I think some leeway can be given with  specific questions.  For example, when I interview youth for limited-use recommends, I do not ask them, "Do you have any financial or other obligations to a former spouse or children?"

 

I also didn't ask youth the questions about wearing their garments . . .

[Scott Lloyd]

The one I got the most confused looks about was "Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church . . ." This did lead to follow-up questions and discussion about what this is referring to.

 

To me, it's an obvious allusion to apostate groups claiming to have authority stemming from Joseph Smith, especially the ones that advocate the continued practice of polygamy. I believe this question was created a while back to address the problem of members of such groups seeking admission to our temples even though they do not accept the current teachings or authority of the Church.

 

That there should be confusion on this point has struck me as surprising, although I now see how it could be confusing to someone who does not have the background understanding I do.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I also didn't ask youth the questions about wearing their garments . . .

Of course, skipping that and the previous question is specifically directed in the questions themselves, so obviously, if they wanted to, the prophets could direct us to skip/alter other questions.

[Hamba Tuhan]

That there should be confusion on this point has struck me as surprising, although I now see how it could be confusing to someone who does not have the background understanding I do.

I have repeatedly had to explain this question to both adults and youth, and still they only have a vague sense that they're supposed to say no. And the question on inappropriate relations with family members has generated so many responses about having once said a not nice thing to a sibling, etc. I do sometimes wish the questions were a bit more forthcoming.