Bombarded With Virtual Church Meetings

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

I kind of want to make it permanent. 😈

I do too! But for other reasons, since I am showered and dressed for such meetings, 'attend' in my lounge room, and don't eat on Sundays anyway.

It's a 30-minute drive to the stake centre, and another 30-minute drive back home again. My sabbath day has grown by an entire hour, and I love it. And to be honest, I can't tell any difference in the actual meetings.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I do too! But for other reasons, since I am showered and dressed for such meetings, 'attend' in my lounge room, and don't eat on Sundays anyway.

It's a 30-minute drive to the stake centre, and another 30-minute drive back home again. My sabbath day has grown by an entire hour, and I love it. And to be honest, I can't tell any difference in the actual meetings.

I dislike almost all forms of formality. I suspect this is not an entirely honest dislike. It is probably because I am terrible at being formal.

[Peacefully]

I love virtual ward council and because we use the free instance of Zoom, it only lasts 40 min:)

I was already a remote worker when all of this started so I spent my days in virtual meetings. In fact most of our managers are remote.

I would have a hard time going back to an office and I will have a hard time going back to in-person church meetings. Home church suits me just fine:)

[Amulek]

On 4/22/2020 at 4:12 PM, alter idem said:

Well, I'm not sure what you feel was not in alignment with the general information you shared. 

Let's break it down.

Elder Dunn said, "We have approved that families start with a family prayer, singing of a sacramental hymn, and then the ordinance. We worry if there is a closing hymn and prayer as that starts to look like a meeting and before long, we might have sacrament meetings being held in multiple locations in the ward." 

So, his guidance for "the event" is comprised of exactly three elements: (1) family (not opening) prayer; (2) a sacramental hymn; and then (3) the ordinance. That's it. Period. Full Stop. He specifically states that if you include a closing prayer, then that starts to look like a meeting, and that's not what is wanted - because that might lead to multiple sacrament meetings in multiple locations. 

The new instructions distributed by the First Presidency state, "Individuals and families are blessed when they can hold a private, home-centered Sabbath worship service, in person or remotely. Such worship can include prayers, hymns, and gospel study. When authorized, priesthood holder(s) are present, the sacrament may be blessed and passed."

Such "worship service" (emphasis added) can be composed of the following elements: (1) prayers - plural (e.g., opening and closing); (2) hymns - again, plural - which could include opening/closing hymns just like in church; (3) gospel study; and (4) the ordinance.

I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty much exactly like a private/personal/miniature/whatever-you-want-to-call-it sacrament meeting. It isn't a ward Sacrament meeting, obviously, because each individual / family obviously doesn't have stewardship over the ward, but it most definitely "look(s) like a meeting" - the very kind of meeting that Elder Dunn was saying should be avoided. 

 

Edited April 24, 2020 by Amulek
Fixed font style.

[Amulek]

12 hours ago, PacMan said:

On 4/22/2020 at 9:23 AM, Amulek said:

Individuals and families are blessed when they can hold a private, home-centered Sabbath worship service, in person or remotely. Such worship can include prayers, hymns, and gospel study. When authorized, priesthood holder(s) are present, the sacrament may be blessed and passed.

While perhaps inferred, the instruction does not say that the sacrament is part of the worship service.

In my view, it pretty clearly does. You have to completely divorce the last sentence from the paragraph to make it be a separate, standalone instruction. 

I wouldn't judge anyone for continuing to do what they had been specifically counseled to do previously, but neither would I hesitate from deviating from that counsel now that more information has been given from a higher authority. 

 

[PacMan]

10 minutes ago, Amulek said:

In my view, it pretty clearly does. You have to completely divorce the last sentence from the paragraph to make it be a separate, standalone instruction. 

I wouldn't judge anyone for continuing to do what they had been specifically counseled to do previously, but neither would I hesitate from deviating from that counsel now that more information has been given from a higher authority. 

 

I take another view. If the Area gave counsel on the one hand, they can give it on the other and reverse themselves. 

[Amulek]

29 minutes ago, PacMan said:

I take another view. If the Area gave counsel on the one hand, they can give it on the other and reverse themselves. 

Well, sure, they can, but should they even need to?

I mean, if your manager at work told everyone in the department to do X, and then the CEO sent an email saying everyone in the company should now be doing Y, would you really keep doing X until your manager expressly told you to start doing Y?

 

[rongo]

56 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Well, sure, they can, but should they even need to?

I mean, if your manager at work told everyone in the department to do X, and then the CEO sent an email saying everyone in the company should now be doing Y, would you really keep doing X until your manager expressly told you to start doing Y?

That's what Hirro Onoda did. He continued to wage guerrilla war in the Philippines until 1974, even though he knew the Emperor had surrendered. His interpretation of the samurai code was that only his immediate commander could order him. Only when his immediate superior Tanaguchi tracked him down did he formally surrender and cease hostilities.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroo_Onoda

[Amulek]

50 minutes ago, rongo said:

His interpretation of the samurai code was that only his immediate commander could order him.

Pretty sure that's not the order of things in the Church though.

If what your bishop says conflicts with what the prophet says, you can safely follow the prophet without waiting for your bishop to come around. 

 

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Pretty sure that's not the order of things in the Church though.

If what your bishop says conflicts with what the prophet says, you can safely follow the prophet without waiting for your bishop to come around. 

I know. I just think his story is interesting, in a sad, tragic way. One of the men with him finally defected after they leafletted letters from family with pictures of his children (now grown adults). 

He took his file leader very seriously.  

[HappyJackWagon]

4 hours ago, PacMan said:

I take another view. If the Area gave counsel on the one hand, they can give it on the other and reverse themselves. 

Good point.

Does it seem silly that there even needs to be discussion about who said what, when. Who has highest authority and whether or not saying a prayer as a family constitutes a meeting and therefore can't be done. It's pretty ridiculous really.

Have home centered church but don't make it look too much like church  

 

[Ahab]

9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Good point.

Does it seem silly that there even needs to be discussion about who said what, when. Who has highest authority and whether or not saying a prayer as a family constitutes a meeting and therefore can't be done. It's pretty ridiculous really.

Have home centered church but don't make it look too much like church  

 

No matter what we do as individual families, we are not and can not be the church.  The church consists of all of the families who are members of it, and we are the Church only as a collective body that includes all of us who are members of it.

[bluebell]

Has anyone made the point that the Utah stakes were specifically asked not to do virtual meetings?  I didn't realize it until I read Fletcher's latest tribune article.

No virtual meetings in Utah, per Utah Area President

Quote

 

That all ended recently when Utah Area President Craig C. Christensen sent a letter to the state’s lay leaders saying, “We have noted that some local leaders or members are attempting to hold sacrament meetings, Sunday school classes, and elders quorum and Relief Society meetings via technology.”

Such online gatherings “should not be held until the First Presidency lifts the directive to suspend those meetings,” Christensen wrote. “Accordingly, please counsel leaders and members against holding online Sunday meetings.”

 

No such direction seems to exist for areas outside of Utah though, which is interesting.

[alter idem]

On 4/23/2020 at 10:02 AM, Amulek said:

Let's break it down.

Elder Dunn said, "We have approved that families start with a family prayer, singing of a sacramental hymn, and then the ordinance. We worry if there is a closing hymn and prayer as that starts to look like a meeting and before long, we might have sacrament meetings being held in multiple locations in the ward." 

So, his guidance for "the event" is comprised of exactly three elements: (1) family (not opening) prayer; (2) a sacramental hymn; and then (3) the ordinance. That's it. Period. Full Stop. He specifically states that if you include a closing prayer, then that starts to look like a meeting, and that's not what is wanted - because that might lead to multiple sacrament meetings in multiple locations. 

The new instructions distributed by the First Presidency state, "Individuals and families are blessed when they can hold a private, home-centered Sabbath worship service, in person or remotely. Such worship can include prayers, hymns, and gospel study. When authorized, priesthood holder(s) are present, the sacrament may be blessed and passed."

Such "worship service" (emphasis added) can be composed of the following elements: (1) prayers - plural (e.g., opening and closing); (2) hymns - again, plural - which could include opening/closing hymns just like in church; (3) gospel study; and (4) the ordinance.

I don't know about you, but that sounds pretty much exactly like a private/personal/miniature/whatever-you-want-to-call-it sacrament meeting. It isn't a ward Sacrament meeting, obviously, because each individual / family obviously doesn't have stewardship over the ward, but it most definitely "look(s) like a meeting" - the very kind of meeting that Elder Dunn was saying should be avoided. 

 

I still fail to see why you think Elder Dunn's counsel is somehow at odds with the general counsel. Both say prayers, hymns, and the general counsel adds gospel study. Unlike your assumption that because he didn't mention it, gospel study isn't allowed (your remark of 'full stop', ), to me, that's an inaccurate conclusion and I disagree with ypur assumption, since we hold gospel study also. I think Elder Dunn is emphasizing the Sacrament ordinance and not the entire pattern we usually follow in church. Did Jesus assign talks, have a special musical number or rest hymn after administering sacrament to his disciples or the Nephites, then a hymn and closing prayer? If some members are equating that whole pattern as the Sacrament service then they are misunderstanding the sacrament. Sacrament ordinance stands alone.  We can invite the spirit with prayer and singing, but a closing hymn and prayer are not required. I believe Elder Dunn's counsel to my area was inspired for us because he holds stewardship here. He gaves us more specific counsel, not contradictory counsel. I shared it, not because I think others should be following it, but because some on this thread were questioning why some said they'd been given counsel on this. I posted the specific counsel my area was given and we've tried to follow.

 

[PacMan]

On 4/23/2020 at 11:06 AM, Amulek said:

Well, sure, they can, but should they even need to?

I mean, if your manager at work told everyone in the department to do X, and then the CEO sent an email saying everyone in the company should now be doing Y, would you really keep doing X until your manager expressly told you to start doing Y?

 

If you can feasibly both, you do both. 

[amo]

On 4/23/2020 at 6:27 PM, bluebell said:

Has anyone made the point that the Utah stakes were specifically asked not to do virtual meetings?  I didn't realize it until I read Fletcher's latest tribune article.

No virtual meetings in Utah, per Utah Area President

No such direction seems to exist for areas outside of Utah though, which is interesting.

Wow, very interesting. It'd be even more interesting to get hold of that letter...

[amo]

On 4/23/2020 at 6:27 PM, bluebell said:

Has anyone made the point that the Utah stakes were specifically asked not to do virtual meetings?  I didn't realize it until I read Fletcher's latest tribune article.

No virtual meetings in Utah, per Utah Area President

No such direction seems to exist for areas outside of Utah though, which is interesting.

Has any1 here gotten / read the letter from elder Craig C. Christensen quoted in the article from the SLT, where stakes in Utah are asked to  stop holding "sacrament meetings, Sunday school classes, and elders quorum and Relief Society meetings via technology" ?

 

 

[rongo]

After an initial, well-received, ward Zoom Sunday School on Sunday, our ward decided to do them weekly. We just got word that the stake president just said not to have any online meetings at all. I'm more than fine with that, but was looking forward to teaching Mosiah 7-11 (more fun and interesting than King Benjamin's address in the second week of that, following two weeks of Easter  ).

It's probably a function of leader roulette, but I wonder how many North American areas are taking their lead from the Utah area (under Elder Christensen, as has been cited). I believe (think) that the various area presidencies (and area authorities under them) are free to add on extra regulations or not, as they see fit. So, we're likely to see a patchwork of policies and practices, as pointed out in the OP.

I'm just bummed that it looks like this is never-ending, and no light at the end of the tunnel. 

[Calm]

37 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'm just bummed that it looks like this is never-ending, and no light at the end of the tunnel. 

How impatient we have become as a culture. A year is an eternity.  Can you imagine what life and communication was like when travel had to be by boat or horse/wagons or foot?  Mail the same. Or living in places where snow cut off one for a season. 
 

We haven’t even gone two months yet since meetings were suspended globally on March 12. 
 

It takes 3 to 6 months of invested effort to see significant difference with muscle growth. And maybe years if in bad shape to become truly healthy. No one sensible would see that time period as unreasonable or worthless effort though.  Maybe it would be helpful to try and see this time as a new spiritual, emotional, and mental health exercise program and think of it as investing effort for a positive change rather than killing time until we go back to normal. 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Calm

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I'm just bummed that it looks like this is never-ending, and no light at the end of the tunnel. 

We're having a great time studying the Book of Mormon as a family.  We read daily during the week and have a discussion based on the lesson Sunday morning after the sacrament.  Our ward held one online Sunday School, but we decided to pass on it. 

I'm actually fine going on for a couple years this way.

I understand that for single members this may not be ideal.

Edited April 30, 2020 by ksfisher

[rongo]

7 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

We're having a great time studying the Book of Mormon as a family.  We read daily during the week and have a discussion based on the lesson Sunday morning after the sacrament.  Our ward held one online Sunday School, but we decided to pass on it. 

I'm actually fine going on for a couple years this way.

I understand that for single members this may not be ideal.

I don't mind home church, either. At all.  I don't think it's ideal long-term for most members, though, and there will be long-term ramifications the longer it continues.

I'm much more bummed because of missions, the economic devastation, my work, and on and on. And the most frustrating thing is that governments are much too overly-cautious about this, in my opinion. What will be the sign that we can begin normalizing? What sign are they wanting or looking for? And they want to keep doing this indefinitely, either ongoing or sporadically, unless a vaccine or treatment is found?

Our governor just extended the stay-at-home until mid-May, and there is no good reason for it other than political caution. We've had like 300 deaths out of 8 million people. Utah is the same --- very good shape, statistically, but unwilling to rock the boat by leading out. And, the Church won't follow until the governments do it, so it's really looking like this could run through the summer. Colleges are seriously talking about not returning in the fall. 

I know that people get upset about my concerns about the missionary department, but I know kids who have calls to report to the MTC (not home MTC) for Spain, Italy, and Brazil, reporting in June/July. It flat-out isn't going to happen, for a number of reasons, and I can't for the life of me figure out why the missionary department would keep on shooting itself in the foot like this. They can't even re-assign them at this point, with stateside kids hunkering down indefinitely. One of our own elders is from Alberta, and he told us that Alberta just shut everything down until September and Alberta is pretty much like Utah. No one knows enough (not even the sainted experts) to know that it will be bad enough in Alberta to shut down the entire summer (in my non-expert opinion, this is insanity), yet leaders keep on extending it indefinitely. And others follow suit, not wanting to be the one it blows up on. It's psychotic. 

[HappyJackWagon]

40 minutes ago, rongo said:

I don't mind home church, either. At all.  I don't think it's ideal long-term for most members, though, and there will be long-term ramifications the longer it continues.

I'm much more bummed because of missions, the economic devastation, my work, and on and on. And the most frustrating thing is that governments are much too overly-cautious about this, in my opinion. What will be the sign that we can begin normalizing? What sign are they wanting or looking for? And they want to keep doing this indefinitely, either ongoing or sporadically, unless a vaccine or treatment is found?

Our governor just extended the stay-at-home until mid-May, and there is no good reason for it other than political caution. We've had like 300 deaths out of 8 million people. Utah is the same --- very good shape, statistically, but unwilling to rock the boat by leading out. And, the Church won't follow until the governments do it, so it's really looking like this could run through the summer. Colleges are seriously talking about not returning in the fall. 

I know that people get upset about my concerns about the missionary department, but I know kids who have calls to report to the MTC (not home MTC) for Spain, Italy, and Brazil, reporting in June/July. It flat-out isn't going to happen, for a number of reasons, and I can't for the life of me figure out why the missionary department would keep on shooting itself in the foot like this. They can't even re-assign them at this point, with stateside kids hunkering down indefinitely. One of our own elders is from Alberta, and he told us that Alberta just shut everything down until September and Alberta is pretty much like Utah. No one knows enough (not even the sainted experts) to know that it will be bad enough in Alberta to shut down the entire summer (in my non-expert opinion, this is insanity), yet leaders keep on extending it indefinitely. And others follow suit, not wanting to be the one it blows up on. It's psychotic. 

I feel bad for all the missionaries who have come home early and those expecting to leave but can't. It does seem like a strange time to continue issuing calls.

I'm curious what you feel the "long-term ramifications" will be regarding an extended home centered church versus the traditional church experience. Care to elaborate?

[alter idem]

20 minutes ago, rongo said:

I don't mind home church, either. At all.  I don't think it's ideal long-term for most members, though, and there will be long-term ramifications the longer it continues.

I'm much more bummed because of missions, the economic devastation, my work, and on and on. And the most frustrating thing is that governments are much too overly-cautious about this, in my opinion. What will be the sign that we can begin normalizing? What sign are they wanting or looking for? And they want to keep doing this indefinitely, either ongoing or sporadically, unless a vaccine or treatment is found?

Our governor just extended the stay-at-home until mid-May, and there is no good reason for it other than political caution. We've had like 300 deaths out of 8 million people. Utah is the same --- very good shape, statistically, but unwilling to rock the boat by leading out. And, the Church won't follow until the governments do it, so it's really looking like this could run through the summer. Colleges are seriously talking about not returning in the fall. 

I know that people get upset about my concerns about the missionary department, but I know kids who have calls to report to the MTC (not home MTC) for Spain, Italy, and Brazil, reporting in June/July. It flat-out isn't going to happen, for a number of reasons, and I can't for the life of me figure out why the missionary department would keep on shooting itself in the foot like this. They can't even re-assign them at this point, with stateside kids hunkering down indefinitely. One of our own elders is from Alberta, and he told us that Alberta just shut everything down until September and Alberta is pretty much like Utah. No one knows enough (not even the sainted experts) to know that it will be bad enough in Alberta to shut down the entire summer (in my non-expert opinion, this is insanity), yet leaders keep on extending it indefinitely. And others follow suit, not wanting to be the one it blows up on. It's psychotic. 

I guess this is a good opportunity to learn patience as this is all out of our individual control.  We can also make special effort to pray for our leaders in our country and other countries. The Lord is able to do his own work, a pandemic will not hamper his work; no unhallowed hand, let alone a plague, can stop it and so to me, there must be some purpose in these experiences, lessons to be learned that are necessary for the kingdom to roll forward to fulfill his plan.  I am often reminded that all things are in the hands of God and is anything too hard for him? No. Missionary work continues, missionaries will survive and hopefully  even find personal understanding, blessings from the disruption and/or delay of their plans. All we can see is the inconvenience to what we assume are the best laid plans, but we are not omniscient. We should not forget this is the Lord's work, his timeline, his plan and we serve in this work at his pleasure. 

[rongo]

22 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I feel bad for all the missionaries who have come home early and those expecting to leave but can't. It does seem like a strange time to continue issuing calls.

I'm curious what you feel the "long-term ramifications" will be regarding an extended home centered church versus the traditional church experience. Care to elaborate?

I think that, while some families are really enjoying and utilitizing "home church" to deepen their gospel knowledge and experience as a family, most families are not. That's how things always are --- the majority live beneath their privileges. The largest percentage of inactives in the Church consider themselves to be LDS, and are decently-disposed towards the Church, they just don't want to do the Church program (attend meetings and services, serve in callings, pay tithes and offerings, be called on to help, etc.). Most inactives are cultural members and cultural inactives --- they want to pursue their own hobbies and interests instead of active Church membership. 

I think that some members and families are getting a taste of not having church or callings, and they like the taste. I think when we do go back to "normal," the ruts are going to be worn deep. I had a RS president who had gone inactive with her husband for about 18 months after the birth of a child (it is fairly common for couples to "take a couple of months off" with a birth, ostensibly so the baby doesn't get RSV, and for some, this extends for more months). They woke themselves up out of this and came back, and that's when she was called as RS president. It was actually a neat experience for me, because there were all kinds of reasons not to call her (relatively young, outspokenly politically liberal , which is a no-starter for me on paper, recently inactive, etc.), but it was one of the most sure revelations I've ever had. And she did a great job. In her call interview, she and her husband said that they looked at each other and said, "Have we gone inactive?", and they were ashamed that the answer was yes. It was an imperceptible "frog in the pot" process.

I think this, coupled with economics, will lead to activity issues, tithe and offering faithfulness issues, employment and self-reliance issues, etc. that are going to have long-reaching, long-term effects as far as the Church, and the overall well-being of many of its members. I think that several months or even longer of no church is going to negatively impact many people. Moroni 6 and other scriptures' imperative of, not only families, but congregations meeting together oft is very important for many reasons. It's most important for strong families to study the gospel in the home, but there is also an indispensable aspect of communal ward and stake worship. 

Them's my sentiments, anyway!   

[rongo]

Just got the letter --- it's from the area authority level for us (not having virtual meetings). He didn't cite any Church headquarters directive, so I think this is at the discretion of each sub-area within the larger areas --- assuming that the area presidency hasn't done any directives (like the Utah area).