If we don’t get what we need out of our church meetings, who is responsible? Presumably, we should leave sacrament meeting spiritually filled, with resources we can draw on to meet the challenges of the coming week. And ideally we would leave Sunday School and Elders Quorum and Relief Society with new insights into the gospel, ideas that will help us act like true disciples of Christ, building a better society where we live. Who should be making sure this happens?
The answer to these questions is, I think, all of us — but as the old saying goes, what is everyone’s responsibility ends up being no one’s responsibility. So, how do we divide up these responsibilities, so everyone knows what they should do and how to make things better?
Even if I had all the answers and the time necessary to explain it all clearly, I don’t think anyone would want to read it all in a single blog post. But, I think I can sketch out some ideas for consideration. Any communication consist of a “speaker”, who originates the message, an audience, who receives the message delivered, and the message itself. In addition, when we are talking about what happens in Church, this model also involves the Church’s handbooks and procedures, and local leaders, who choose the speakers and teachers, and give direction for the topics presented.
When we think about communication in our society today, we usually think first on the speaker — we place most, or sometimes all, of the responsibility for the message on the speaker. If the message didn’t reach the audience, we think it’s the speaker’s fault. But that’s not always right. The audience has a responsibility to pay attention, doesn’t it? And local leaders have a responsibility for making sure that the speaker is able to present the message, right?
Well, I think it’s more complicated than that. Let me ask some questions about each of the actors in this little responsibility play. First, should local leaders only be thinking about getting the message to the audience? What about training speakers? If you are training speakers, isn’t the talk or lessons going to be deficient sometimes? Do local leaders also have responsibility for the diverse nature of the audience? Should they be looking for speakers to connect to the best educated members of the audience? Or to the children? Should they be looking to provide variety in the talks and lessons? Or consistency? Is the variety or consistency in doctrine? Or in style?
Next, we all agree that the speaker has a responsibility to prepare well. But what does that mean? What audience is the speaker preparing for? It seems like most speakers can only prepare in they way that they know, and with the time they have available. Is it most irresponsible to give a poorly prepared message? Or leave leaders in the lurch without a speaker?What is the nature of the speaker’s responsibility to the leaders who asked them to speak? And what is their responsibility to the audience? Do they know that responsibility?
And finally, what about the audience? Yes, we all know we should put down our phones and pay attention. Is that our only responsibility? Given that our local leaders often don’t have much experience, does the audience have a responsibility to be patient? How and when does the audience have the responsibility to give feedback to leaders? Or directly to the speaker? In classes, doesn’t the audience have a responsibility to participate? To ask questions and give readings? To respect what the teacher (aka the speaker in the communication in class) is trying to teach?
Perhaps just as importantly, doesn’t the audience have a responsibility to other members of the audience? Do we have a responsibility to avoid distracting others? To make comments that help improve the lesson?
How often do we think about these responsibilities? And when something doesn’t work, how often are we focused on how it’s someone else’s fault and not on what we, the audience, could have done differently?
In these posts I am trying to suggest that each of us can have better experiences at Church if we recognize not only the responsibility of others, but also our own responsibility. We need to take responsibility for our experience in Church and learn 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, 2025 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.
Leave a Reply