What Was Revealed to You In Church (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 3/22)?

LDS beliefs are firmly based in the idea of continuing revelation — both revelation to the Church as a whole, and personal continuing revelation to each of us. But sometimes we limit this idea by our assumptions. I think many of us assume that personal revelation comes at home, in personal prayer and contemplation. I’m quite sure that this assumption is incomplete.

So, couldn’t revelation come to us at Church?

And, if it can, are we actually looking for it at Church?

In these posts I am trying to suggest that each of us can have better experiences at Church if we take responsibility for our experiences, and if we are open to what we can be taught to us in many different ways. We can choose to learn and benefit from what happens regardless of whether it fits our perception of what is “good.” Revelation, I believe, can piggyback on whatever communication will be successful in reaching our spirits.

Revelation sometimes depends on how we look at it. It is not different from what many artists figure out—they understand that how you see the  world before you is more important than what you see. You might call it ‘active listening’ or shifting perspective. It just means that you see differently. And seeing differently reveals a different world.

In my case, I tend to focus narrowly, thinking about groups of words or sentences, sometimes taking them out of context and thinking about what they say, even if the speaker didn’t intend what I heard. It’s not at all like what we’re taught in school, where the focus is on understanding accurately and completely what the speaker or text says. Its about pulling out useful or inspiring thoughts in spite of what was said.

So, if you aren’t thinking this way, maybe try it next Sunday, or the next time you are in a class or meeting. If you have already thoughts inspired by what happened at church, what are they? How did you react to what happened in Church yesterday? What did you notice? Did you end up thinking differently? Do you think your reactions were what they should be? Were they looking for what God had to tell you? Did your reactions make things better?

This is the latest invitation for reactions to local meetings, continuing the spirit of my post on September 25th about how we receive what happens in Church meetings—sermons, lessons and anything else—and enter a conversation with them, magnifying what was said or adding what we think. In these posts I’m asking us all to think about how we listen and receive what happens at Church. If we only listen for mistakes, or things that bother us, what does that say about us? Is it most important to criticize others? Or to try to change ourselves?

The point here is that no matter how poorly prepared the speaker or teacher is, or no matter how what happens triggers us, or is objectively or doctrinally wrong, we can still find elements in what is said and what happens that inspires and edifies us. Even if church meetings aren’t conducted in a way that reaches us, we can take responsibility and find a way to feel the spirit.

So please, write down reactions and thoughts to what happened in Church. You might keep your own ‘spiritual journal’, or, if you like, you can post your reactions below. I’m adding my own reactions and thoughts as a comment to this post — instead of as a part of this post, because my reactions aren’t any better than anyone else’s.

Let me emphasize that this is NOT a place to criticize what is wrong with church or your fellow congregants. The point is to post what you learned because of what happened at Church or how that led you to think. It’s about the good things we can get out of Church, not the negative things that disturbed or upset us. It doesn’t have to be orthodox, traditional or even on topic.

If you like, make your response in the format, “They said or did this, and I said or thought that.” Even the things you dislike the most can be turned into lessons for what the gospel teaches we should do.

My hope is that these reactions serve as an example of a better way to treat what happens at Church instead of the perennial complaints about speaker or teacher preparation or ability, or complaints that the Church should do things differently.


Comments

One response to “What Was Revealed to You In Church (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 3/22)?”

  1. Here are a few of the things I thought about because of attending Church meetings yesterday (3/22):

    • One speaker suggested that youth speaking in church was something that built faith. While I think youth should speak in church, I am not sure I agree. Speaking in church does build speaking abilities, self confidence, etc., but I don’t think it builds faith in and of itself. I think, like with most not-specifically faith-based activities, it depends on how it is approached. Yes, if the youth exercises faith in preparing the talk, or studies a faith-related topic, it can build faith. But otherwise? I think it can be good for the youth, but not necessarily faith-building.
    • The lesson in priesthood focused on the idea of temperance, and one comment suggested that self-control is central to temperance. True, I think. But temperance is also about balance, about finding a point between two extremes, because both of those extremes can have undesirable consequences. I think there’s a lot more to temperance than simply not going overboard.
    • Before church started in a small branch I attended, one of the members came up to talk to me. Eventually, I wondered about before church activities, and what might be best for those attending. Certainly there is benefit to talking to others before church; handled correctly it can create a good spirit to go into the meeting. Also good is prayer and meditation before church—exactly the opposite of talking to others. And, I think many preparatory activities (setting the sacrament table, putting up the hymn numbers, etc.) are not only necessary, but improve the meeting because they avoid problems or help the meeting run smoothly. What is best before a meeting? I’m honestly not sure!
    • A comment made in class, in response to the idea of agency, mentioned God using His agency. The idea stood out to me, because I don’t think we talk much about God’s agency — it’s something we kind of assume, but also something that we sometimes assume doesn’t exist because we think everything God does is because it is right, not because its what he has chosen to do. Where is the boundary between God doing something because it is the right thing to do, and God choosing to do a good thing (perhaps one of many possible good things)? We have the agency to make choices like this, so why don’t we talk about God’s agency to make choices?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.