Contemporary Church Services

[hope_for_things]

25 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

Great point, I attended a Ward in Utah where they had two different Gospel Doctrine classes each Sunday. I asked my son, how do you choose which to attend? I also said it must be nice to have a choice of which teacher you like, his reply was, "no, it is splitting the Ward apart, with a lot of hurt feelings". He want on to say that, "even families are in different rooms and after Sacramet, you even see husbands and wives tugging at each other to go to one or the other". 

In my last ward I was in the Sunday School presidency and we always had 2 Gospel Doctrine classes and sometimes a third alternative class such as a strengthening families, or family history class, or even a provident living class.  I don't remember it every being a source of controversy or contention.  I loved it, and all the feedback I heard was that the ward really appreciated having options and learning from different perspectives.  

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I can't remember where I read it, but I seem to recall reading where Brigham Young was holding spirited dances in the Nauvoo temple.  I've also read about early LDS gifts of the spirit, speaking in tongues, call and response sermons, etc.  I think the 19th century church was much different than today when it comes to the concept of reverence.  

Has anyone done a study about reverence and quiet as a form of worship within the LDS church?  I think that would be an interesting study, I wonder which leaders emphasized this, and what the history around the development of our worship services has been like.  

Many different people from many different Churches brought different ideas to a new Church. But, our meeting are like most Churches other than Baptist and Pentencostal. Southren Baptist and Pentencostal type meetings of today borrowed much of their style from early Black Churches. Quakers, which influenced our Fast and Testimony style of meeting, where members would just sit quietly until someone had something to say. In the early Church, and in Nauvoo many (or most) were held outside. Our style is more like Methodists, Presbyterian and much like Westren Europian Churches, of which much of early membership came. 

[Jeanne]

22 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

 I guess ward choirs are kind of an individual ward thing - which I think could really help our services - especially with introducing new beautiful music. The idea that the only music our hymnal should contain should be only what Emma Smith picked out is just archane to me.

My impression with ward choirs is that Choiristers are very hesitant to single out individual members for guidance for fear they will get offended, and most wards simply are not big enough to have excellent  choirs. From time to time my ward has had duets or quartets - a rare treat.

I loved musical numbers..any kind.  I remember my sister and I sang together a lot..without the piano..but with guitars and my Dad on the mandolin.  For the bicentennial year in 1976, we asked the Bishop if we could include some other type music..patriotic and it worked out beautiful.  In our stake, we had people travel all over and participate in different wards.  It added a nice touch.

[hope_for_things]

6 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

Many different people from many different Churches brought different ideas to a new Church. But, our meeting are like most Churches other than Baptist and Pentencostal. Southren Baptist and Pentencostal type meetings of today borrowed much of their style from early Black Churches. Quakers, which influenced our Fast and Testimony style of meeting, where members would just sit quietly until someone had something to say. In the early Church, and in Nauvoo many (or most) were held outside. Our style is more like Methodists, Presbyterian and much like Westren Europian Churches, of which much of early membership came. 

Interesting.  What timeframe did our current style really solidify, its been this way my entire life, but I'm only in my early 40s.  Were services this way 100 years ago?  As I understand it, they didn't even have weekly Sunday sacrament services in the early church in Nauvoo, but that developed later in the Utah time period. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

In my last ward I was in the Sunday School presidency and we always had 2 Gospel Doctrine classes and sometimes a third alternative class such as a strengthening families, or family history class, or even a provident living class.  I don't remember it every being a source of controversy or contention.  I loved it, and all the feedback I heard was that the ward really appreciated having options and learning from different perspectives.  

You seem to be speaking of three different type classes at the same time, lots of Ward do this. I was speaking of different classes teaching the same class at the same time. We did the same thing in our Ward, but unless different callings couples usually attended together. What my son was talking about were people choosing from different styles of teaching. He said this caused people to worry about upsetting friends, or husbands and wives arguing (quietly) over which TV program to watch. He said sometimes people should talk about in Sacrament talks in an attempt to be funny. 

[hope_for_things]

10 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

You seem to be speaking of three different type classes at the same time, lots of Ward do this. I was speaking of different classes teaching the same class at the same time. We did the same thing in our Ward, but unless different callings couples usually attended together. What my son was talking about were people choosing from different styles of teaching. He said this caused people to worry about upsetting friends, or husbands and wives arguing (quietly) over which TV program to watch. He said sometimes people should talk about in Sacrament talks in an attempt to be funny. 

So we had both, we had an alternative SS class with a different subject matter, and we always had 2 gospel doctrine classes as well.  Those two GD classes would teach the same lesson, just in different rooms and people would gravitate to the teacher that they liked better.  Actually for a while we had alternating teachers as well, so 2 teachers for each GD class, they would alternate teaching every other week.  I didn't like that as much, so 4 GD teachers in the ward was too many in my opinion.  But I did like having the two different GD classes, it made for smaller classes where the members were more willing to participate instead of one really large class with the same people commenting each week.  I think it worked much better from my perspective.  

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Interesting.  What timeframe did our current style really solidify, its been this way my entire life, but I'm only in my early 40s.  Were services this way 100 years ago?  As I understand it, they didn't even have weekly Sunday sacrament services in the early church in Nauvoo, but that developed later in the Utah time period. 

Our weekly meetings grew out of all over time. In the past we have had Prophets who gave firery sermons, real fire and brimstone types. In my Stake we have had Stake Presidents who have very powerful oratory sermons, just like Elder Holland does today. Almost every Church has same format, songs, prayers, speakers. All that differes in the tone and delivery of the speakers, little else is different. Some have live bands, but most are the same...organs and such. Church of Christ and some others only sing, because musical instruments were not used in early Church, as in early NT Church. 

[fam4evr]

So, as a convert to the LDS church, I was Catholic for 18 years, and then attended an evangelical church for 5-ish years. I have mixed feelings about Sacrament Meetings.  I love the reverence and quiet during the administration of the Sacrament.  But the rest of it...zzzzzzzz.  Literally.  With so many of the songs sounding similar, and the speakers, all standing behind a pulpit, I feel I spend so much energy trying to stay awake (yes, I do need more sleep....) and concentrate,

 

The evangelical church I went to, I also had mixed feelings about the services.  I loved the music. Sometimes a little too edgy, but usually just soulful singing, with arms raised, praising the Lord. Just amazing, and spirit-filled.  But not considered "reverent" by LDS standards.  I also liked how the pastor would walk around while speaking, and not just stand in the same place.  Not sure how that would work with our chapels (and lay-ministry speakers) but it sure kept things a little more interesting.

[HappyJackWagon]

7 hours ago, fam4evr said:

So, as a convert to the LDS church, I was Catholic for 18 years, and then attended an evangelical church for 5-ish years. I have mixed feelings about Sacrament Meetings.  I love the reverence and quiet during the administration of the Sacrament.  But the rest of it...zzzzzzzz.  Literally.  With so many of the songs sounding similar, and the speakers, all standing behind a pulpit, I feel I spend so much energy trying to stay awake (yes, I do need more sleep....) and concentrate,

 

The evangelical church I went to, I also had mixed feelings about the services.  I loved the music. Sometimes a little too edgy, but usually just soulful singing, with arms raised, praising the Lord. Just amazing, and spirit-filled.  But not considered "reverent" by LDS standards.  I also liked how the pastor would walk around while speaking, and not just stand in the same place.  Not sure how that would work with our chapels (and lay-ministry speakers) but it sure kept things a little more interesting.

If I'm not mistaken there are different Orders within Catholicism, eg Jesuit, Franciscan etc.

So within the umbrella of the church there are variations permitted. Could something similar happen in Mormonism or would we be too afraid of the protestant model of reformation?

[Gray]

At one point, everything in our hymn book was based on contemporary and popular worship music. I see no reason to think there is anything more holy about contemporary 18th and 19th century music as compared to 20th and 21st century music. 

[Jeanne]

From experience...(though i got in trouble) if you want to get the most out of the sacrament songs, use them as a musical number.  It really makes a difference.

[rodheadlee]

On 6/27/2016 at 10:12 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

I've recently attended services at a Methodist church. One time I attended a traditional service held in their sanctuary/chapel and another time I attended their "contemporary" service held in the multipurpose room. The traditional service was very similar to ours. Organ music and hymns. Pews/rostrum. The contemporary service had a band that played worship music and the congregation sang along. The lyrics were projected onto large screens along with the scripture reading and some other multimedia materials. Both services featured a sermon by the same pastor and both offered communion to all.

It was interesting to see that the contemporary service had a much larger attendance. I had expected to find the traditional service to be attended mostly by the older generation and the contemporary by the younger, but that wasn't my experience. In both cases there was a good mix of demographics in the service. Members simply attended whichever style of service they preferred.

I've been thinking about this because I really enjoyed the contemporary service. I enjoyed the music. I enjoyed the rock style music and countdown clock that led to the beginning of the service. It was new to me because culturally the lds church doesn't do contemporary style music, let alone a countdown on a big screen. But it was cool. People got enthused and they were ready and paying attention when the countdown ended. The service was fun and inspiring.

I think much of the lds style of worship service is simply cultural and tradition but I don't see that it would need to be. People were able to praise God in the contemporary service just as they were the traditional. Would there be room in the LDS church for a split in styles of worship to accommodate different preferences? Obviously leaders would have to approve, but I can't see any legitimate reason why there couldn't be a variety of worship practices that touch different people in different ways. I'd love to have a contemporary lds service.

Has anyone else thought about this?

Yeah, I've been to all kinds of churches, even drive in churches. I prefer our set up. i read my scriptures while waiting for Sacrament I love reading my scriptures with the the Holy Spirit present. This can happen at home or at sea a 1000 miles from nowhere. The key is to have a quiet area with no distractions.

[carbon dioxide]

I would just like the length of meetings reduced a bit.  They can easily shave 30 minutes off on Sunday like just have one talk after sacrament or just have sacrament, announcements, and then go to classes.  Share testimonies in classes.  

[HappyJackWagon]

10 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

Yeah, I've been to all kinds of churches, even drive in churches. I prefer our set up. i read my scriptures while waiting for Sacrament I love reading my scriptures with the the Holy Spirit present. This can happen at home or at sea a 1000 miles from nowhere. The key is to have a quiet area with no distractions.

If the primary need to feel the spirit is quiet, then the system of gathering together as a community may not be the most conducive to the spirit.

[Gray]

29 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

If the primary need to feel the spirit is quiet, then the system of gathering together as a community may not be the most conducive to the spirit.

I suspect different things are conducive to fostering that experience to different people. For me, I do need quiet, and time spent alone in the woods is the absolute best for me.

Sacrament meetings is one of the worst. The temperature is usually uncomfortable (they don't turn on the AC until the first day of summer, and even then it's ineffective), there's a lot of distractions, and the speakers are never that good (I include myself - I'm a bad speaker). 

If you want a meeting that is conducive to transcendent spiritual experiences, I suspect it's easier to get the ecstatic variety in a group experience. The problem with that is that culturally we reject ecstatic spiritual experiences. But the quiet spiritual experiences just don't work well in church meetings as currently structured. At least for me. 

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

If the primary need to feel the spirit is quiet, then the system of gathering together as a community may not be the most conducive to the spirit.

 

Perhaps that's why Christ went into the wilderness to be with God.

Edited July 1, 2016 by JLHPROF

[Gray]

34 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

 

Perhaps that's why Christ went into the wilderness to be with God.

That's so appealing to me

Edited July 1, 2016 by Gray

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

I suspect different things are conducive to fostering that experience to different people. For me, I do need quiet, and time spent alone in the woods is the absolute best for me.

Sacrament meetings is one of the worst. The temperature is usually uncomfortable (they don't turn on the AC until the first day of summer, and even then it's ineffective), there's a lot of distractions, and the speakers are never that good (I include myself - I'm a bad speaker). 

If you want a meeting that is conducive to transcendent spiritual experiences, I suspect it's easier to get the ecstatic variety in a group experience. The problem with that is that culturally we reject ecstatic spiritual experiences. But the quiet spiritual experiences just don't work well in church meetings as currently structured. At least for me. 

I stood on the shore of the Atlantic in Virginia and saw the full moon across the water....I felt the breeze and the quiet of some ripply water and it was there that i saw the hand of God.  I have sang "The Lord's Prayer" out loud in the Utah mountains and felt a presence so powerful.  Meetings don't do this.

[The Nehor]

I would like less music in total. I find music boring unless it is a background to something else I am doing. Listening to the choir sing or someone playing the flute is dull to me. It would be equally dull to me if it was a band.

Since we are tailoring sacrament meetings can I have a "no music" version?

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

I stood on the shore of the Atlantic in Virginia and saw the full moon across the water....I felt the breeze and the quiet of some ripply water and it was there that i saw the hand of God.  I have sang "The Lord's Prayer" out loud in the Utah mountains and felt a presence so powerful.  Meetings don't do this.

I'm right there with you!

[gopher]

I'm OK with Sacrament meetings now, except when the concluding speaker is only left with 5 minutes and still gives a 20 minute talk.  I stop listening and start thinking how I'm going to adjust my SS lesson.  Plus all the children in the congregation can sense when Sac meeting should be over.

I also stop feeling the Spirit shortly after speakers go over their allotted time.  And few people can give a decent talk from a note card with a brief outline instead of a written out talk. Those are my complaints.

It wouldn't hurt to update the hymn book with some more modern music.  Maybe something from Saturday's Warrior?

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, gopher said:

I'm OK with Sacrament meetings now, except when the concluding speaker is only left with 5 minutes and still gives a 20 minute talk.  I stop listening and start thinking how I'm going to adjust my SS lesson.  Plus all the children in the congregation can sense when Sac meeting should be over.

I also stop feeling the Spirit shortly after speakers go over their allotted time.  And few people can give a decent talk from a note card with a brief outline instead of a written out talk. Those are my complaints.

It wouldn't hurt to update the hymn book with some more modern music.  Maybe something from Saturday's Warrior?

I'm more upset at the person who took the last speakers time away, and left to give a 20 min. talk in 5 min. And in my experience the majority of the time, it does end on time. 

I would speed up some of our hymns too.

 

[JLHPROF]

18 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I would speed up some of our hymns too.

We already did that.  We virtually never sing every verse if there are more than 3 or 4 any more.
Works for most, but some songs suffer when we don't sing the entire song (A Poor Wayfairing Man for instance or How Firm A Foundation).  At least, that's my opinion.

[HappyJackWagon]

19 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'm more upset at the person who took the last speakers time away, and left to give a 20 min. talk in 5 min. And in my experience the majority of the time, it does end on time. 

I would speed up some of our hymns too.

 

Nah. Let's sing all 7 verses of the funeral durge. It's great...really...It doesn't depress me at all.

[Guest]

On June 27, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Tacenda said:

I prefer the current style we have in the church, but that's because of my conditioning, and maybe having a hard time with change.

"Conditioning"...sounds like you think you have been brainwashed. It is a worship service, not a cult designed to promote faith, not to destroy it. It is my Faith and Church and it is painful to see it trying to be undermined by others. It may not be for all, but it is for me.