Bishop Bans Electronic Devices

[Bob Crockett]

17 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Unruliness on the part of youth in your charge is hardly justification to forbid me or other responsible persons from making good and appropriate use of a mobile device.

Well, many in the Church and not just me think it is not appropriate.  But it isn't that big of a deal.  I happen to know of at least one stake president here in my area who has banned them for sacrament meeting and it does no good and nobody seems to care.   It isn't worth getting worked up about it.

 

[HappyJackWagon]

33 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Well, many in the Church and not just me think it is not appropriate.  But it isn't that big of a deal.  I happen to know of at least one stake president here in my area who has banned them for sacrament meeting and it does no good and nobody seems to care.   It isn't worth getting worked up about it.

 

I think in concept it is worth pushing back against. It is an overstep of authority by the bishop. He can counsel and request, and teach members not to do something but when he starts commanding them, then he is at least approaching unrighteous dominion.

[Bob Crockett]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think in concept it is worth pushing back against. It is an overstep of authority by the bishop. He can counsel and request, and teach members not to do something but when he starts commanding them, then he is at least approaching unrighteous dominion.

It isn't worth it.  Pick your battles when it is important.  My wife doesn't like cell phones at the dinner table.  I comply even though I'd rather not.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

Well, many in the Church and not just me think it is not appropriate.  But it isn't that big of a deal.

Just trying to understand here: Do you think it is inherently inappropriate regardless of the use to which the device is put?

[mnn727]

3 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

Well, many in the Church and not just me think it is not appropriate.  But it isn't that big of a deal.  I happen to know of at least one stake president here in my area who has banned them for sacrament meeting and it does no good and nobody seems to care.   It isn't worth getting worked up about it.

 

It IS worth getting worked up about. if a new bishop tried pulling it in my ward, I'd raise the roof. The Church supplies and promotes the electronic Gospel Library and its not up to some local luddite to forbid them.

Edited November 29, 2016 by mnn727

[HappyJackWagon]

56 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

It isn't worth it.  Pick your battles when it is important.  My wife doesn't like cell phones at the dinner table.  I comply even though I'd rather not.

I definitely appreciate the concept of picking your battles. But I'm reminded a bit of the "broken windows" theory of community policing. Attention to the details prevents more egregious crimes. So if we're talking about unrighteous dominion, it may be best to address it when it is a small, simple issue so it doesn't grow out of control.

[Bob Crockett]

5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Just trying to understand here: Do you think it is inherently inappropriate regardless of the use to which the device is put?

Is it inherently wrong to show up at church with a big ink stain on your face?   Your zipper down?  

[mnn727]

21 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Is it inherently wrong to show up at church with a big ink stain on your face?   Your zipper down?  

Thanks for the non-answer.

[Scott Lloyd]

On November 29, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Bob Crockett said:

Is it inherently wrong to show up at church with a big ink stain on your face?   Your zipper down?  

So you equate using a mobile device at church with that? I have to say this strikes me as extremely irrational.

I can have some understanding of those who object to allowing the devices at Church because of the propensity some might have of using them to surf the internet or play games while sitting in sacrament meeting, though I don't agree that's a justifiable reason for banning them outright for everyone.

But you're giving no other reason for imposing your will on others than you have this quirky visceral aversion to them. This makes no sense on any level.

In an earlier post on this thread, I noted that two general Church leaders involved in a worldwide satellite leadership training meeting used iPads to read and cite scriptures. You would equate what they did to appearing with ink stains on their faces or their zipper down.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Bob Crockett]

As I keep saying, it isn't really a big deal.  I think it annoying to see somebody at the podium giving a talk and seeing the bishop or his counselors working on his phone.  As a bishop I've plenty of time sat next to higher authorities than me watching them check their email or facebook entries while testimony meeting is going on.  It is annoying to have to preside over meetings for a while and stand at the podium and see congregants surfing the web on their ipads at every Sunday.   But, no more annoying that having a family member surf the web at the dinner table or a student doing it in a classroom.  I personally don't think it annoying enough to issue an edict about it and I've never done it except as a teacher of the youth.  But I merely comment that it is about as gauche as coming to Sacrament Meeting with a Bluetooth earset hanging from your ear.  About as gauche as wearing a hat in Sacrament meeting.   Gauche isn't defined in a manual.  It is subjective standard of politeness and consideration.  I won't wear a hat.  I won't wear a bluetooth connector in the company of others.   I won't haul out my phone at cocktail parties, academic presentations, Sunday School meetings and so forth. 

If you like your electronic device in meetings, I don't criticize you for it.  But, I also am very sympathetic to the stake president or bishop who wants to ban them and I would rather just comply than murmur about it.  

[Scott Lloyd]

On 11/30/2016 at 9:35 AM, Bob Crockett said:

As I keep saying, it isn't really a big deal.  I think it annoying to see somebody at the podium giving a talk and seeing the bishop or his counselors working on his phone.  As a bishop I've plenty of time sat next to higher authorities than me watching them check their email or facebook entries while testimony meeting is going on.  It is annoying to have to preside over meetings for a while and stand at the podium and see congregants surfing the web on their ipads at every Sunday.   But, no more annoying that having a family member surf the web at the dinner table or a student doing it in a classroom.  I personally don't think it annoying enough to issue an edict about it and I've never done it except as a teacher of the youth.  But I merely comment that it is about as gauche as coming to Sacrament Meeting with a Bluetooth earset hanging from your ear.  About as gauche as wearing a hat in Sacrament meeting.   Gauche isn't defined in a manual.  It is subjective standard of politeness and consideration.  I won't wear a hat.  I won't wear a bluetooth connector in the company of others.   I won't haul out my phone at cocktail parties, academic presentations, Sunday School meetings and so forth. 

If you like your electronic device in meetings, I don't criticize you for it.  But, I also am very sympathetic to the stake president or bishop who wants to ban them and I would rather just comply than murmur about it.  

I'll tell you what. I disapprove of each and every one of the things you complain about here and will stand shoulder to shoulder with you in opposing them.

But they are not what you were talking about in the prior post, where you said that the mere presence of a mobile device is inappropriate at church -- you compared it to going to the meeting with your zipper down. Saying that no one should be allowed to carry a mobile device to church because some are inclined to use such things inappropriately while there is contrary to the spirit of teaching correct principles and leaving it up to people to govern themselves.

I have never seen anyone at church wearing blue tooth earphones, and I've gone on record as disapproving the making and receiving of cell phone calls while in a church meeting. I'm happy to report I've never seen that happening in my neck of the woods.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Bob Crockett]

I didn't say that carrying a cell phone into sacrament meeting is akin to having your zipper down.  You asked if it is inherently wrong to have a cell phone in sacrament meeting.  I merely responded by asking if it is inherently wrong to have your zipper down in sacrament meeting.  Who is defining inherently wrong?  Maybe the zipper is broken.  Maybe that's the style.  Who knows?   Is it inherently wrong to haul out your cell phone in sacrament meeting and check your work email and then toggle over to a hymn?  I'd say, "no," but if a bishop has asked that it not be done, I'd try to comply.  If a bishop called me into his office and asked my family to live on our year's supply for a month and then give a talk about it in a month, I'd explain to him why that is wrong and has been the subject of counsel in the past.  I'd likely not do it.  (I turned down my branch president, Milton Backman, when he called me to be branch organist.  Somebody had seen me play one of the three hymns I could play out of the hymnbook.)

Edited December 1, 2016 by Bob Crockett

[Thinking]

Today in one of my classes it was necessary for me to remind the students more than usual to put away their phones. I finally remarked, "I'll bet you guys play on your phones during church." There was a lot of guilty laughter and then one student said, "Church is three hours long. What else do you expect us to do?" More guilty laughter.

I remember when cell phones first came out. There really were no rules or laws governing their use. As they became more common, so too were the issues that were born because of the distractions they cause. Laws were enacted and rules put into place to help minimize the distractions. Why should church be any different? If the leader (the Bishop) sees an issue that needs attention, why can't he create a policy that he thinks will help?

[Jeanne]

I figure if people are still welcoming and saying "hello"..that is always a plus.  I can't get people to look at me anymore and have a conversation.  Of course, I have never owned a cell phone...what you guys are talking about is really foreign  country to me.  I have a landline..I can pick up...or not.  But my life is heads up and online/real print stuff.  This wouldn't matter one bit to me in any meeting.  I know that if I was a speaker and everyone was looking down or clicking away.. I would feel bad.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, Thinking said:

Today in one of my classes it was necessary for me to remind the students more than usual to put away their phones. I finally remarked, "I'll bet you guys play on your phones during church." There was a lot of guilty laughter and then one student said, "Church is three hours long. What else do you expect us to do?" More guilty laughter.

I remember when cell phones first came out. There really were no rules or laws governing their use. As they became more common, so too were the issues that were born because of the distractions they cause. Laws were enacted and rules put into place to help minimize the distractions. Why should church be any different? If the leader (the Bishop) sees an issue that needs attention, why can't he create a policy that he thinks will help?

As with every other aspect of life, reason and common sense should guide the enactment of any law or policy.

As has been repeatedly expressed here on this thread, there is not a thing wrong with teaching and reminding youth and even adults in the ward that certain uses of smartphones or other electronic devices are inappropriate, including net surfing, gaming, texting, calling or taking calls, etc. But there's a wide territory between that and banning devices outright, which strikes me as extremely heavy-handed, especially in a religious culture that values teaching people correct principles and then allowing them to govern themselves.

Moreover, there is the glaring disconnect between such a ban and the fact that the church provides such rich content for use on hand-held mobile devices.

Or, as mnn727 so pithily put it: "The Church supplies and promotes the electronic Gospel Library and its not up to some local luddite to forbid them."

Incidentally, my wife and I have no trouble at all keeping our kids from playing on their devices during worship services. I think it's largely a matter of parental guidance.

[Johnnie Cake]

8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Scott, I'm not stocking you...but I did want to take a walk back from the comments that got me banned from the other thread.  I just want to apologize for my tone.  I believe you to be a good honest person of high moral character. I do not know you personally nor have we ever to the best of my knowledge met IRL and I believe that many of my comments were uncalled for.  It was wrong of me to take your online persona and make conclusions based on what I get from your posts...while each of our respective posts are somewhat representative of who we are...on some level they are also caricatures of who we actually are in real life as well.  I sincerely apologize for both the tone and content of my earlier vent that I directed at you. 

I wish you nothing but the best in life.

Craig (the man behind the online JonnieCake persona)

[Jeanne]

39 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Scott, I'm not stocking you...but I did want to take a walk back from the comments that got me banned from the other thread.  I just want to apologize for my tone.  I believe you to be a good honest person of high moral character. I do not know you personally nor have we ever to the best of my knowledge met IRL and I believe that many of my comments were uncalled for.  It was wrong of me to take your online persona and make conclusions based on what I get from your posts...while each of our respective posts are somewhat representative of who we are...on some level they are also caricatures of who we actually are in real life as well.  I sincerely apologize for both the tone and content of my earlier vent that I directed at you. 

I wish you nothing but the best in life.

Craig (the man behind the online JonnieCake persona)

Virtual rep here...a big one!!

[Thinking]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As with every other aspect of life, reason and common sense should guide the enactment of any law or policy.

Like if the members won't quit playing on their phones, the bishop might make a policy banning them so that the others who are present can worship without distraction.

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As has been repeatedly expressed here on this thread, there is not a thing wrong with teaching and reminding youth and even adults in the ward that certain uses of smartphones or other electronic devices are inappropriate, including net surfing, gaming, texting, calling or taking calls, etc. But there's a wide territory between that and banning devices outright, which strikes me as extremely heavy-handed, especially in a religious culture that values teaching people correct principles and then allowing them to govern themselves.

When they refuse to govern themselves, what then? There are patrons who are trying to worship and all those little screens (that aren't on lds.org) most likely make it difficult to focus.

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Moreover, there is the glaring disconnect between such a ban and the fact that the church provides such rich content for use on hand-held mobile devices.

The disconnect was not created by the Bishop. It was created by the members who were accessing content other than that rich content.

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Or, as mnn727 so pithily put it: "The Church supplies and promotes the electronic Gospel Library and its not up to some local luddite to forbid them."

I'm curious. Are electronic devices allowed in temple sessions?

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Incidentally, my wife and I have no trouble at all keeping our kids from playing on their devices during worship services. I think it's largely a matter of parental guidance.

Bravo! If other parents in that ward were able to control their kids and themselves, a ban would not have been necessary.

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Scott, I'm not stocking you...but I did want to take a walk back from the comments that got me banned from the other thread.  I just want to apologize for my tone.  I believe you to be a good honest person of high moral character. I do not know you personally nor have we ever to the best of my knowledge met IRL and I believe that many of my comments were uncalled for.  It was wrong of me to take your online persona and make conclusions based on what I get from your posts...while each of our respective posts are somewhat representative of who we are...on some level they are also caricatures of who we actually are in real life as well.  I sincerely apologize for both the tone and content of my earlier vent that I directed at you. 

I wish you nothing but the best in life.

Craig (the man behind the online JonnieCake persona)

I thank you for the apology. I recognize that it took courage and innate decency. 

I still disagree that same-sex attraction is inherently pajorative or that being politically incorrect necessarily makes a thing pajorative. 

[HappyJackWagon]

13 hours ago, Thinking said:

Like if the members won't quit playing on their phones, the bishop might make a policy banning them so that the others who are present can worship without distraction.

Bishops should ban all distractions including children. Those little scallywags are the biggest distractions imaginable.

When they refuse to govern themselves, what then?

Lets take them out back and beat the tar out of them. OR we could recognize that they are governing themselves. Just because we don't like the way they are governing themselves doesn't mean we have authority to usurp their individual authority and begin governing them for their own good.

There are patrons who are trying to worship and all those little screens (that aren't on lds.org) most likely make it difficult to focus.

I think those patrons would do well to focus on themselves. While I agree that patrons aren't able to avoid all distractions such as a phone ringing during the sacrament, but otherwise, if they are focused on the speaker they won't see what a person is holding in their hands. Perhaps returning to the old Mormon Creed "Mind your own business", would be appropriate.

The disconnect was not created by the Bishop. It was created by the members who were accessing content other than that rich content.

I have yet to see anyone illustrate the harm that is caused to the congregation if someone in the 5th row happens to be checking their facebook. Until it is shown to be a congregational harm it shouldn't be the business of the congregation or its leaders. Without that harm, a person using an electronic device "inappropriately" is really just governing themselves.

I'm curious. Are electronic devices allowed in temple sessions?

Silly question. At what point during the temple session would members need to look up a hymn on their device? Would they have need to pull out scriptures and read about Christ during the sacrament? IOW- there wouldn't be the same need during a temple session. Also, a lit screen in a dark room could easily be shown to be a distraction to other patrons whereas a lit screen in a lit room (sacrament meeting) wouldn't be noticeable.

Bravo! If other parents in that ward were able to control their kids and themselves, a ban would not have been necessary.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. If parents had controlled the kids (or themselves) the bishop wouldn't need to control their behavior. This is about control.

 

[Woody]

Our ward choir director put a lot of work into getting the choir ready to sing a certain special hymn. On the day of, tho, she was sick and someone else directed. I felt sorry for her and without a lot of thought, pulled out my phone and took a photo of the choir singing so I could send her the picture. Unfortunately for me,
a) I forgot to silence the camera click sound
b) the bishopric had vacated their seats to sit in the congregation
c) the bishop was right in front of me, camera about six inches from his ears

[bluebell]

13 minutes ago, Woody said:

Our ward choir director put a lot of work into getting the choir ready to sing a certain special hymn. On the day of, tho, she was sick and someone else directed. I felt sorry for her and without a lot of thought, pulled out my phone and took a photo of the choir singing so I could send her the picture. Unfortunately for me,
a) I forgot to silence the camera click sound
b) the bishopric had vacated their seats to sit in the congregation
c) the bishop was right in front of me, camera about six inches from his ears

Don't leave us hanging.  What did the bishop do??

[rongo]

Even worse is the filming/photographing of ordinances (mostly baptism). I have been in a position to directly address this before the fact with the families (that they can't photograph or film the baptism), but it sometimes happens that family/friends come and it needs to be lovingly but firmly explained. Sometimes people are really peeved and think it's a stupid policy, but the policy is very clear. Funerals, too. I have had family start setting up a tripod in the chapel, and have had to explain that the service may not be videorecorded (audio, yes). There has been anger and frustration with this, too.

No matter how much one tries in advance to head off potential concerns, it is the nature of things that they will crop up, anyway.

[mnn727]

17 hours ago, Thinking said:

When they refuse to govern themselves, what then?

They are always governing themselves, it may not be the way YOU want them to, but they are governing themselves.

[mnn727]

Quote

Bishops should ban all distractions including children. Those little scallywags are the biggest distractions imaginable.

 

Amen!! My wife and I have a saying many Sundays "The Natives are getting Restless"