Often today we are urged to simplify things. We boil down our tasks or our conceptions to the essential, to the “elevator pitch” —something that can be explained in a few words. There’s almost an industry teaching us how to make our businesses simpler, our tasks simpler, our lives simpler.

But what do we loose when we simplify? And when we simplify things, are we simplifying the right things?

It’s clear that simplifying means that something is lost, and we assume that what is lost isn’t worth much. But rarely does anyone go far enough to examine our assumptions and values about what should be preserved when we simplify. If we take the sentence “The brown fox ran across the wet fields to the grey barn” and remove all the colors, how do we know we haven’t left out something vital? Are we assuming that colors aren’t important? What if we are doing a color check on a photo of a painting? Does that change our assumptions?

We always and unconsciously make decisions like this. Our brains have preconceptions about what is important—preconceptions that are not always correct. And we bring these preconceptions with us everywhere —— including to Church. But with effort, it is possible to see our preconceptions and see differently. We can choose to look at more details that what our minds are trained (by the rest of our lives) to see. We can examine why we are rejecting some details, and privileging others. We can choose to react in ways that actually build spirituality—we can choose to react in ways that show our love, connect us to God and increase our understanding of the gospel. We don’t have to be boxed into the reductive viewpoint that comes from simplifying what we hear through a lens imposed on us by the rest of our lives. We don’t have to see Church as if it’s a P&L or a logistical problem to be maximized. Instead, we can see Church as, well, the gospel.

So, how are you simplifying what happens in 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 learning from what happens by pondering it — by thinking about it 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.” Thinking about our reactions and what we understand allows for revelation and for better understanding.

In this vein, I like the statement that President Hugh B. Brown made in a 1969 BYU devotional, President Hugh B. Brown declared that the Church is “not so much concerned with whether your thoughts are orthodox or heterodox as we are that you shall have thoughts.” We should be carefully considering what we hear at Church, regardless of whether what we heard is right or wrong, orthodox or heterodox. 

A lot of our thought 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 a series of weekly posts that started with 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.