Improving Sacrament Meeting: Seeking Suggestions

[toon]

Replace the water with wine.

[toon]

  

• Meetings should begin on time...period.  No excuses.  Make that happen.

 

And perhaps more importantly, they should end on time.

 

This isn't just a sacrament meeting thing.  When I have to pick my daughter up from her Primary class at the end of the block, the EQ teacher of the week can't go over five minutes because he feels he has something extra important and new to say on a lessen we've all heard 100s of times.  I can't count the number of times I've had to apologize to my kid's Primary teacher, who waits with the young kids in the class until a parent or family member comes by because she just can't leave them alone to wander the halls.  I know it's rude, and I've explained it to the EQ president, but I've taken to getting up and walking out of EQ at the top of the hour precisely because of this.

[Avatar4321]

Maybe we should be asking ourselves a main question:

How does the change we are suggesting bring the Spirit to the meeting?

[Nofear]

Interesting article: "Mormon Sundays: A historian looks at how we’ve observed the Sabbath since 1830"
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1978/01/mormon-sundays?lang=eng

[Rain]

Perhaps the Bishop could give a short talk before testimony meeting reminding the congregation what "testimonies" actually are and reminding speakers to stick to that.

Have you ever attended a testimony meeting where all the speakers actually stuck to testimonies?

I have on rare occasions and it is usually a true spiritual feast.

Never. Not once, but I have often thought it would be a spiritual feast if it happened.

[Buckeye]

Ward councils and Bishoprics in our Stake were instructed this past Sunday by members of the Quorum of the 12 and Young Women General President (Bonnie Oscarson) and Primary General Prsident (Rosemary Wixom) regarding a change in the way Sacrament Meetings are to be planned throughout the Church. Some of the content of this training has already been discussed on two currently open threads on this Board. The main takeaways of the training for me were:

1. The Quorum of the 12 wants Sacrament Meetings to be more spiritual and Christ-centered.

2. The ordinance of the Sacrament should be emphasized as the key to the spiritual experience of the meeting.

3. The ordinance of the Sacrament is an opportunity to renew all of our covenants.

4. The entire Ward Council should participate in planning Sacrament Meetings.

5. Sacrament planning should incorporate strategies--in particular--that account for and address the needs of women and children.

At the end of the training, our Stake President charged the Bishops to conduct a discussion during the next Ward Council about specific suggestions each of us might have that will help accomplish these goals.

My wife and I have discussed 2 possible suggestions I could make:

1. Assign a scripture reading or short spiritual thought to a Woman or Young Woman to be read just prior to the Sacrament hymn.

2. Assign the Young Women to alternate with the Young Men as ushers.

I would be interested in (and very much appreciate) your feedback on these two ideas, and would also be very interested in any other ideas/suggestions you--especially the women among us--might have. What would enhance your spiritual enjoyment during Sacrament meetings?

 

I believe the current handbook discourages this practice, though it still crops up in some wards, particularly in Utah for some reason.

 

My calling is with the YM. I would add a focus to ensure that the YM who are serving in the sacrament (administering, preparing, passing) are given sufficient time for the ordinance to take effect in their own lives.

[rockpond]

And perhaps more importantly, they should end on time.

 

This isn't just a sacrament meeting thing.  When I have to pick my daughter up from her Primary class at the end of the block, the EQ teacher of the week can't go over five minutes because he feels he has something extra important and new to say on a lessen we've all heard 100s of times.  I can't count the number of times I've had to apologize to my kid's Primary teacher, who waits with the young kids in the class until a parent or family member comes by because she just can't leave them alone to wander the halls.  I know it's rude, and I've explained it to the EQ president, but I've taken to getting up and walking out of EQ at the top of the hour precisely because of this.

 

I still remember fondly my EQ president from over 15 years ago who held us to this policy:  "We (the EQ) will end our lesson at 5 minutes BEFORE the hour every week so that we can quietly fold up our chairs and then be standing outside our childrens' classroom doors when they finish."

 

It was a great system.

[rockpond]

I love this thread.  I have read each post and taken notes for our upcoming ward council discussion on this.  Thank you all.

[Buckeye]

At the risk of derailing the thread, I believe the most significant way to improve spirituality during the sacrament ordiance would be to remove the restriction on women performing the ordinance. God's influence is as prominent through women and girls and men and boys. God's influence is stronger when we work in unity for his purposes. Having women and girls serve alongside men and boys in the ordinance of the sacrament (and all other ordinances) would bring us closer as families, closer as ward families, and closer to Christ. We've seen an increase in spiritualy as gender restrictions have been removed for women saying prayers, women serving missions, and other forms or service. An even greater increase would accompany women and girls kneeling at the alter and passing the hold emblems alongside their brothers, husbands, and fathers.

[HappyJackWagon]

Perhaps the Bishop could give a short talk before testimony meeting reminding the congregation what "testimonies" actually are and reminding speakers to stick to that.

Have you ever attended a testimony meeting where all the speakers actually stuck to testimonies?

I have on rare occasions and it is usually a true spiritual feast.

I tend to take the approach that LESS correlation is better. Correlating HOW people bear testimony and WHAT they should say may benefit some congregants but may hurt the person who feels the spirit prompting them to share. Or maybe they just want to share a story that gives context to their testimony. I think that is great and the person should have relative freedom to express themselves without feeling that they will be judged for saying the wrong thing.

 

I'd much prefer to hear a story that illustrates a testimony over a list of beliefs. I think we need to get out of the business of telling people how to express their testimony and let them tell it from the heart.  Correlated testimony meetings are generally not all that spiritual IMO.

[stemelbow]

I tend to take the approach that LESS correlation is better. Correlating HOW people bear testimony and WHAT they should say may benefit some congregants but may hurt the person who feels the spirit prompting them to share. Or maybe they just want to share a story that gives context to their testimony. I think that is great and the person should have relative freedom to express themselves without feeling that they will be judged for saying the wrong thing.

 

I'd much prefer to hear a story that illustrates a testimony over a list of beliefs. I think we need to get out of the business of telling people how to express their testimony and let them tell it from the heart.  Correlated testimony meetings are generally not all that spiritual IMO.

I'm in the EQP. Last week we met as a presidency and the President and 1 Counselor congratulated themselves for getting up the week before just after two of our well known tangent takers bore their testimonies. The SP has asked all leaders in wards and the stake to get up and get meetings back on track. In the end, I was like, that was lame. I'd rather hear Bro Drainey telling me his sorrows and laments and take a few extra minutes then hear you guys get up, prompted by a mere mortal, to tell me that which the 8 year old repeats.

I'm with ya on this. I used to be pretty adamant about testimonies going off course and that we should stick to the plain elements. But I'm opposite now. It's about the people to me, what they actually feel and what they actually think--don't want to hear repeated dogma and mantra.

[bluebell]

I still remember fondly my EQ president from over 15 years ago who held us to this policy:  "We (the EQ) will end our lesson at 5 minutes BEFORE the hour every week so that we can quietly fold up our chairs and then be standing outside our childrens' classroom doors when they finish."

 

It was a great system.

 

We did this when i was the RS president in North Dakota in order to make sure we were out when the kids were.  It makes sense.

[toon]

I tend to take the approach that LESS correlation is better. Correlating HOW people bear testimony and WHAT they should say may benefit some congregants but may hurt the person who feels the spirit prompting them to share. Or maybe they just want to share a story that gives context to their testimony. I think that is great and the person should have relative freedom to express themselves without feeling that they will be judged for saying the wrong thing.

 

I'd much prefer to hear a story that illustrates a testimony over a list of beliefs. I think we need to get out of the business of telling people how to express their testimony and let them tell it from the heart.  Correlated testimony meetings are generally not all that spiritual IMO.

 

I agree.  Combine that with my wine suggestion, and it could be epic.

[bluebell]

At the risk of derailing the thread, I believe the most significant way to improve spirituality during the sacrament ordiance would be to remove the restriction on women performing the ordinance. God's influence is as prominent through women and girls and men and boys. God's influence is stronger when we work in unity for his purposes. Having women and girls serve alongside men and boys in the ordinance of the sacrament (and all other ordinances) would bring us closer as families, closer as ward families, and closer to Christ. We've seen an increase in spiritualy as gender restrictions have been removed for women saying prayers, women serving missions, and other forms or service. An even greater increase would accompany women and girls kneeling at the alter and passing the hold emblems alongside their brothers, husbands, and fathers.

 

It would only bring us closer to Christ if it was the way that Christ wanted it done.  For those of us who are not convinced of that, no other 'good,' regardless of what it was, would make up for the 'bad' of doing ordinances in a way that was condemned by Christ.

 

 

So, until revelation declares that women need to participate, there's really, from my perspective, no use even talking about how 'awesome' it would be.

[bluebell]

I tend to take the approach that LESS correlation is better. Correlating HOW people bear testimony and WHAT they should say may benefit some congregants but may hurt the person who feels the spirit prompting them to share. Or maybe they just want to share a story that gives context to their testimony. I think that is great and the person should have relative freedom to express themselves without feeling that they will be judged for saying the wrong thing.

 

I'd much prefer to hear a story that illustrates a testimony over a list of beliefs. I think we need to get out of the business of telling people how to express their testimony and let them tell it from the heart.  Correlated testimony meetings are generally not all that spiritual IMO.

 

I think that people should be counseled to share experiences that helped them to reach their testimony if at all possible.  

 

I don't really get much out of someone standing up and saying 'I know this church is true, that JS was a true prophet and that the BOM is true" and then closes and sits down.  I want to feel a connection to what the person is saying because that helps me to feel the spirit, but it's hard for me to feel that connection without context.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

It would only bring us closer to Christ if it was the way that Christ wanted it done.  For those of us who are not convinced of that, no other 'good,' regardless of what it was, would make up for the 'bad' of doing ordinances in a way that was condemned by Christ.

 

 

So, until revelation declares that women need to participate, there's really, from my perspective, no use even talking about how 'awesome' it would be.

While this is true, there is much that could be done without revelation. Having women pass and prepare the sacrament. Allowing women to hold their babies while they are being blessed. Allowing women to serve as witnesses to baptisms and other ordinances. Allowing mothers to participate in blessings as described here. We live far beneath our privileges.

[bluebell]

While this is true, there is much that could be done without revelation. Having women pass and prepare the sacrament. Allowing women to hold their babies while they are being blessed. Allowing women to serve as witnesses to baptisms and other ordinances. Allowing mothers to participate in blessings as described here. We live far beneath our privileges.

 

I agree.  But as you said, that would not need revelation (necessarily.  I still think it would be a good idea to know God's thoughts on the matter!) because none of that directly involves the ordinances.  Buckeye specifically said having men and women involved in the ordinances together, which is the angle i was coming from.  

[SeekingUnderstanding]

I agree.  But as you said, that would not need revelation (necessarily.  I still think it would be a good idea to know God's thoughts on the matter!) because none of that directly involves the ordinances.  Buckeye specifically said having men and women involved in the ordinances together, which is the angle i was coming from.  

I get that. I didn't mean to imply you were opposed to any of the things listed. Your post was a convenient jumping off point. Thanks 

[bluebell]

I get that. I didn't mean to imply you were opposed to any of the things listed. Your post was a convenient jumping off point. Thanks

I figured as much. I just wanted to make sure I was making sense and saying what I thought I was saying. I've been known to not be super clear sometimes.

[Okrahomer]

I believe the current handbook discourages this practice, though it still crops up in some wards, particularly in Utah for some reason.

 

 

If you could point me to a page, I'd sure appreciate it.  Part of my thinking on this comes from the way all of our Bishopric, Ward Council and PEC meetings (as well as others) are organized--there is always a slot for a "scriptural thought" on our agenda.

[Jeanne]

I wish High Councilors would get rid of parroting general conference talks, if my 12 yr son has to come up with his own material for a primary talk then certaintly high councilors should come up with their own stuff

Love this..and because children see truth through their innocent observations, they make us even more teachable. 

[Okrahomer]

Replace the water with wine.

 

This totally made me laugh....right out loud!  Thank you!

[JLHPROF]

I tend to take the approach that LESS correlation is better. Correlating HOW people bear testimony and WHAT they should say may benefit some congregants but may hurt the person who feels the spirit prompting them to share. Or maybe they just want to share a story that gives context to their testimony. I think that is great and the person should have relative freedom to express themselves without feeling that they will be judged for saying the wrong thing.

 

I'd much prefer to hear a story that illustrates a testimony over a list of beliefs. I think we need to get out of the business of telling people how to express their testimony and let them tell it from the heart.  Correlated testimony meetings are generally not all that spiritual IMO.

 

Nobody is asking for a correlated testimony meeting.

 

A testimony is what you know to be true and how God manifested that truth in your life.  If that involves an anecdote, so be it.

What a testimony is not is an excuse to preach a pet sermon, fill us in on your entire life the past month, weep uncontrollably for no real reason, or give thanks for every cent of money and grain of food you've received item by item.

 

Of course we want people to speak as prompted by the spirit.  They can give testimony of whatever they are moved to.  There's no list or restriction.  But a testimony is a witness of a truth and it is in the bearing witness of God in their lives that others are strengthened.  That is the purpose of a testimony meeting.  That is all I was referring to.  Context is certainly not what I was speaking against.

 

And think what an aid it would be to the youth if when they stood up and said "I know this Church is true" that they both understood what that means and expressed how they know it.

[Okrahomer]

Babysitting issues:

 

Bluebell and others mentioned the difficulty of "babysitting" during Sacrament Meetings.  This was discussed and recognized as a big issue during the training--of course, actual solutions were not provided.  Those, it seems, will be left up to us; however, I appreciate the responses from Calmoriah and others regarding potential aids, such as the Ward Bulletin puzzles, etc.

 

And just as Calmoriah mentioned, my wife wonders why it would not be possible to record the talks, so both shut-in’s as well as “babysitters” could listen later.  During the discussions at our Stake training, one sister said:  "I miss the old-style chapels that had a "cry-room"--why don't we have those anymore?"  Our Stake President shook his head in agreement but did not offer an answer.

[Okrahomer]

Formal Scripture Reading:

 

I am someone who has always loved hearing a scripture read aloud, with deliberation, with thought and a bit of feeling.  It happens sometimes during a Sacrament Meeting talk--that someone will read a scripture in such a way that it penetrates my soul.  I have also experienced this in other Churches where public scripture reading seems to be a formal part of their worship service. 

 

I agree with several of you about being careful that the scripture (or spiritual thought) not be the same each week.  I am thinking that a beautifully and thoughtfully read scripture or thought related to the ordinance of the Sacrament (Topical Guide Atonement, Sacrament, Jesus Christ) would help "demarcate" what we are about to do.  The thinking behind the suggestion comes from the example of other Church meetings (i.e., Bishopric, Ward Council, PEC, Presidency, etc.) which always include a “scriptural thought” at the beginning of the meeting as part of the standard agenda.

 

It was suggested that formal scripture reading may be officially discouraged in the Handbook.  If that is true, then I probably will not make the suggestion.  If anyone can point me to a page in the Handbook where this is discussed, I would appreciate it.

 

And thanks so much, to everyone, for all of your thoughts and suggestions.  This is really helpful!

Edited June 18, 2015 by Okrahomer