The Purest and Simplest Way to Make Sacrament Meeting a True Worship Service and a Revelatory Experience

I have read quite a few comments from people decrying a lack of emphasis on Christ in our Sacrament Meetings.  They acknowledge the prayers in his name and the sacrament itself, but they are concerend about how often the talks are not focused on Jesus or Heavenly Father in an obvious (or even implied) way. 

I have been in such Sacrament Meetings, and I understand that concern.  I even agree with it to the extent that it happens, which, I agree, is too often.  My response is pretty straightforward, since I believe the "solution" is quite simple. 

The central issue is not at "The Church" level. It's an issue in individual wards and branches, since the Branch Presidents and Bishops are the ones who are responsible for the topics assigned as Sacrament Meeting talks. Too many of them still don't understand fully what it means to have a meeting set aside as a worship service - and too many of them still assign topics for Sacrament Meeting that will be addressed in Sunday School and/or should be reserved for the third hour in Priesthood and Relief Society meetings, but when they catch that vision and "get it" with regard to Sacrament Meeting, it's wonderful. I've lived in wards where that happened, and I've visited wards and branches where that happens, and there is a marked difference in those congregations that spills over into other areas, as well.

For the last few years, I have had the good fortune of being in a position from which I can mention that to local leaders and be taken seriously, and I have done so and will continue to do so. It sounds simplistic, but I believe making Sacrament Meeting a true worship service (a "revelatory experience" - as Elder Bednar said in the recent CHI training) can do more for a ward than just about anything else - and it certainly is the simplest and purest of the options.

Sunday School Lesson: Prophecy, Seership & Revelation are Not the Same Thing

Last Sunday, we did a bridge lesson between Apostasy & Restoration and Prophets & Revelation.

I drew a simple timeline on the chalkboard from Adam & Eve to today. I asked everyone to list where in our scriptures we have extended periods of no recorded revelations. We identified four gaps of at least 200 years (and explicitly left out most of the Old Testament and Ether, since they covered thousands of years and were written largely as sweeping genealogical statements rather than careful histories): the end of the Old Testament (roughly 400BC - Jesus' birth); Omni (with its "stuff happened and I gave the plates to the next guy" summary); 4 Nephi (four generations of righteousness); the end of the New Testament to the Doctrine & Covenants. I mentioned the Dead Sea Scrolls and what I consider to be revelation to others outside our scriptural canon as exceptions to theses periods of silence, but we focused on our Standard Works.

We talked about how the Jews at the time of Christ were divided in many ways, just like the Christians at the time of Joseph were divided in many ways - but that one of the few things they all agreed on was that "scriptures" had stopped. Interpretations continued, but God no longer gave scripture. Thus, there were two clear instances of "Great Apostasy" in our Judeo-Christian history: the Jewish apostasy from Malachi to Jesus and the Christian apostasy that started when the Bible was canonized.

We then focused on the definitions of "prophet", "seer" and "revelator". I mentioned that we tend to roll them together into one practical word - "prophetseerandrevelator" - without distinguishing the unique meanings of each term. We talked about how prophecy in ancient times was reading the signs of the times and predicting the results of continued or changed actions; seership is seeing things in ways that cannot be seen naturally, particularly with the help of divine tools; revelation is the uncovering / revealing of things that have been hidden. At that point, the lesson took an interesting turn.

One of the students asked how OD 2 (lifting the Priesthood ban) fits into this - if it was a revelation based on the definition we had discussed. (The student who asked is very bright.)  I told the class that I had promised them when I was called as their teacher that I always would be honest with them about how I see things personally. I grinned and said that I was about to tell them the Gospel According to Ray, then I told them that I see OD 2 precisely as revelation in that context, since it uncovered the fact that the ban had been instituted without revelation - that the ban originally had not been based on revelation but that foundation had been obscured and lost over time as the ban continued. I mentioned that Pres. McKay stated later that the ban was policy not doctrine and that OD 2 "revealed" that flawed foundation officially. I then used OD 1 (the Manifesto) as an example of prophecy, as opposed to revelation, since Wilford Woodruff said explicitly that he had seen a vision of what would happen to the Church if polygamy continued ("reading the signs of the times and predicting the results of continued actions").

They all seemed to understand that distinction, and I was glad the question was asked, since I hadn't thought to use the declarations as an example.

A Wonderful Sacrament Meeting Experience: God Bless Truly Humble and Selfless Saints

The following experience happened some time ago, but it came to mind tonight - so I thought I would write a post about it.  I hope it touches someone and is an answer to prayer in some way:

I normally like to arrive at least 30 minutes early when I am visiting a ward or branch as part of my calling, but, due to circumstances I don't need to detail here, I arrived at the branch I was visiting with only about 5 minutes to spare. When I walked in and spoke with the Branch President, he told me that they had just realized as the young men were preparing the sacrament this morning that they were out of cups for the water. They were discussing what to do as a result.

They had decided to shift the sacrament to the end of the meeting, so the Branch President could drive home and bring a bunch of small drinking cups from his house. It would be a bit awkward and difficult to manage, but it was the only solution that came to mind. I suggested they go ahead and follow that plan, but that I would call someone in my home ward (which met at the exact same time as the branch) and see if they had any extra sacrament cups - and ask if anyone in that ward would be willing to miss their own meetings and attend the branch that day in order to allow the branch to use regular cups for the sacrament at the end of their meeting. The Branch President left to go home to get his cups, and I called a few numbers I had on my cell phone until I reached the High Priests Group Leader.

He stepped out of the chapel to take my call just as my ward was singing the opening hymn. He then went back into the chapel, spoke with someone in the Young Men's Presidency, called me back and told me he would bring four sleeves of cups to the branch right away - enough that they could use them again for a couple of weeks if they were unable to get more of their own right away. This good man told his wife and sons what was going on, left Sacrament Meeting before the sacrament was passed, drove 40 minutes to the branch, handed me the cups, then turned around and drove back to his ward without taking the sacrament in the branch - because he had to get back in time to teach the lesson during the last hour to his own high priests.

I took the cups to the priests at the sacrament table in the middle of the final talk, and they finished preparing the trays and the table just as the final special musical number was ending - an absolutely gorgeous solo about the birth of Jesus. They literally were lowering the covering on the sacrament as the final note was ending.

There's something amazing about hearing the sacrament prayer said immediately following a beautiful musical number - when the Spirit is so strong you can feel it almost tangibly. There's also something truly touching about listening to that prayer ("are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son") while picturing the good man who made it all possible driving alone for another 40 minutes back to his own building, having missed participating himself so that he could make it happen for others and still perform the very mundane tasks of his calling.

I know it's a "small thing" in the grand scheme of things, but it certainly brought to my mind the verse:

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

Dealing with Our Own Personal Dissent

Dealing with Our Own Personal Dissent - Jeff Lindsay (Mormanity)

The Difficulties and Benefits of Online Congregations

A friend of mine who participates quite actively online at one particular Mormon-themed blog asked me a couple of years ago how I felt about the possibility of the LDS Church establashing online wards and/or branches.  The following was my response to him (again, a couple of years ago, so the initial information is a bit dated by now):

It is happening now in some areas with Seminary for those who can't attend the traditional early morning classes. Our stake is part of the pilot program, and I have been impressed overall - even though I was skeptical a bit at first, given my background in education and instructional software. In a couple of years, when the Church has gone through the entire four-year cycle of classes and has time to work out system bug issues, I can see it being rolled out broadly for all students who have been doing home-study Seminary. It is not designed as a replacement for traditional Seminary, but it is a wonderful program and effort.

I agree totally with the recent statement in General Conference about the danger of losing tangible, physical contact in the temptation to interact more and more online, but I also believe strongly in the power of online interaction - obviously, given my rather prolific participation in the Bloggernacle. There is great potential for something like that to be a positive force, but there also is great potential for negative influences in a setting like that. Can you imagine a testimony meeting (or any meeting, really) in a setting where concerted hacking is a possibility?

There are issues that would have to be reconciled (like how to handle things like the sacrament), but if the sacrament is not being taken anyway (since the people aren't attending anyway) . . . [Note: My friend suggested mailing congregants a packet of pre-blessed bread and water that could be used at the appropriate time.  There are plenty of factors about that suggestions that concern me, but I don't rule it out automatically.]

Overall, I really like and would support the idea if it could be limited to those who are in locations and situations where they simply can't attend. I wouldn't want it to be a substitute for physical attendance with people who are capable of attending the traditional services. To me, a HUGE part of charity and true Zionist community is learning to interact with, serve and actually love those with whom I disagree, even passionately about some things - and I'm not sure a virtual ward would be able to provide that in quite the same way as a traditional ward can.

Rather than seeing it as virtual ward (with all of the callings associated with the traditional organization), I can see the basic format of the Sunday Meetings being broadcast live - with talks, prayers, classes, etc. provided by a core group of members. Again, however, it probably would need to be "restricted" to members identified by their Branch Presidents, Mission Presidents and Bishops as not being able to attend the traditional services - through a user name and password like is in place to access lds.org's stake and ward directories section.

That was my initial reaction. I certainly am open to other views and suggestions.

If You Don't Like to Shave, Here's a Post to Use When Your Bishop Says You Should

It is not true that the beard makes a man look like a bear or a monkey - Ardis Parshall (Keepapitchinin') 

The Concept of Marriages Being "Sealed" Is Beautiful and Powerful, but It's Not Automatic

I think the ideal of eternally sealed marraiges needs to be articulated AND "embodied" - to be accepted "publicly" as an open statement of intent. There's a degree of that in "'til death do us part" (since it articulates staying together until the end in many people's eyes) - but I really want the ideal to be forever. Symbolizing that eternal commitment truly to start with a distinct "two" and become an inseperable "one" means a lot to me, and I think it should be "embodied" in an actual, physical, participatory ordinance / ceremony.  Therefore, I absolutely love temple sealings. 

Personal opinion time:

Is there anything magic or automatic in it? Absolutely not.

When it comes down to it, will it make a bad marriage good or a decent marirage excellent, in and of itself?

Absolutely not.

Will it automatically make two become one? Absolutely not.

Will the lack thereof keep two who truly have become one through life from continuing as one after death?

Absolutely not.

So, why bother?

Ideals should be taught and embodied in symbolic action as much as possible, imo - since that really does mean something to the vast majority of those involved, and since there truly is great Beauty and Power in such an ideal.  I believe in that ideal deeply and passionately, and having a way to make it "tangible" and "recorded in my soul" means a lot to me.

Teaching Children to Build a Faith that Will Last: Disagreeing with Something Said at Church

I teach my kids what I believe - and that it's what I, personally, believe - and that others believe some of those things differently than I do - and that it's ok. I teach them that they can believe what makes sense to them - and that it's their responsibility to figure out what makes sense to them so they can be agents unto themselves.

My kids know when I don't agree with something that was said at church - because I mention it and we talk about why I don't agree. I don't go into great detail quite often, but when things are said that I see differently . . .they know about it.

However, they also know how much I like and love and sustain whoever said it. That is a critical aspect of any discussion I have with them, since I also want them to know that I will like and love and sustain and respect THEM when I learn about ways that their beliefs end up differing a bit from mine.  

I hope and pray my children love the Restored Gospel as much as I do, and I hope all of die as active members of the LDS Church - but I also hope and pray they do so because of a deep, personal understanding of the Gospel and the Church that will sustain them when I am gone.  Part of that, I believe, is learning to disagree but still love and sustain those with whom they disagree.

An Incredible Practical Joke - h/t to Sistas in Zion

Church Meetings, Libraries and Personal Enlightenment: It's Hard to Serve Both Explorers and Settlers

Communities of ANY kind survive ONLY when the majority (and a fairly large majority) are focused on building them - putting in the "labor hours" and capital to make them stable. The explorers don't want to be constrained by the rules of the community, but they almost always want the support of the community when they are injured, or can't find game to kill for their own food, or just want to hear someone else's voice - or dance and sing - etc. every once in a while.

Community leadership, therefore, simply must create a society in which the settlers stay and receive what they need (stability and order and security) - understanding that the wanderers will stay only if they are tied emotionally (spiritually) to the community in some way. They know they can't GIVE the explorers what they need inside the community; those explorers have to FIND it on their own - inside or outside the community.  That's just how explorers are wired. 

Explorers need to find their joy and not ask others to give it to them - and they shouldn't begrudge the organization and leaders who do "give" so many what they want and need just because what the settlers want and need is different than what they, as explorers, want and need.  The explorers need to be grateful that the settlers can and will build a community in which those explorers can participate (which can be the home base for their explorations, if you will) even thought they seek much of their understanding from outside sources, as well.

On the other hand, the settlers need to allow the explorers to explore.  Our own Doctrine & Covenants says, after all, that we are to seek learning out of the best books - without any specific qualifiers as to what those books are and where they can be found.  If someone can find all the sources they need and want in their own local library, that is wonderful - as it works for them; if someone else needs to travel far and wide to find books in other libraries, as well as the ones that are in their own local library, that is wonderful, as well.