- ReTx on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “I will own that I am completely checked-out during sacrament. It’s true. Interestingly, I started writing in a journal during Sacrament several years ago. What happened (and part of this is I am a writer so the moment I put pen-to-paper, my brain goes into that mode) was that I ended up writing poetry. Some spiritual poetry, some not. But I found working out my own thoughts way more engaging than listening to the speakers’. Go figure. I still do that sometimes. One of the things that keeps occurring to me though is that this whole problem is one of the reasons other churches use paid clergy who have some training or inclination toward public speaking. It’s also why using the physical church building to visually give the audience beauty and stimulation really helps too. And I’d throw in music that engages as well, as we have great hymns but don’t use them effectively. I’m not worried about offending the speaker by not paying attention. The vast majority of speakers are too focused on getting through their talk to notice. Those that know watch for audience reactions/make eye contact, only do so for the first five to six rows or so. Including me on the last, It’s just too big of a room for more. (Speaking of Sacrament meeting.)” Aug 9, 08:30
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “Sorry Kent, I didn’t answer your final question. I think you are completely correct in what you have been saying since your original post on this subject. We do have very little recourse over someone else’s actions, whether those actions are leaders who are in charge of sacrament meetings or members who are asked to speak in sacrament meetings. They will do what they are doing regardless of us. We can become irritated, we can get angry, we can mentally check out, or we can try to find something of value in what is being offered to us. I think you’re being wise to keep reminding us that those first three options don’t contribute to our happiness.” Aug 9, 08:20
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “Hi Kent, I appreciate that you’re willing to engage with everyone who comments. I too have not personally been in a sacrament meeting where someone has literally read a general conference talk. That is because thankfully my ward does not ask people to use conference talks as topics for sacrament meeting talks. What I have seen many times is an ill prepared or just nervous person teach a priesthood lesson from a general conference talk by just reading large sections of it verbatim. So I have no doubt that the same thing is happening in sacrament meetings when leaders ask members to use general conference talks as topics for their talks.” Aug 9, 08:08
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “I should add a thank you for all these responses. They have been very helpful in refining my thoughts. I hope it doesn’t seem like I have all the answers here. I am only trying to suggest a way of making our experiences better without waiting for church leaders or the culture in general to change.” Aug 9, 00:25
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “ReTx: “ If it was as easy as you said to find the needed engagement in the current set-up, more people would be doing it. Because they are the very people who are present and want a meaningful experience.” Well, I think the reason people don’t do it is more because our society models being an audience as being a passive observer who is supposed to be entertained. The idea that the audience can take responsibility for how they react and find ways of thinking differently about what they hear is not something that enters their minds. So I’m trying to point out a different way. I do think some people are doing it. For example, I see some people writing thoughts in a “spiritual journal” or noting their thoughts in a diary of their experiences in church. I’ve found myself taking notes on my phone of things I thought of in response to what happens in church. Perhaps that would be a way of making the experience of church more visual and less auditory?” Aug 9, 00:23
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “Not a Cougar: I think I misread what you said then. I didn’t see the claim about the culture. I agree that “blaming the audience for not being raised in a culture that is prepared to do the heavy lifting you want them to do is not a helpful criticism.” But I must still disagree that I’m blaming the audience. My position is that most of us don’t have the ability to fix this. We aren’t involved in choosing the speakers, we aren’t training the speakers, we aren’t assigning the topics. There has been plenty of complaining about the quality of meetings, and I’m sure it will continue. What will it take for those complaints to be heard and changes made? I don’t know. I suspect it will be a while. SO, what do we do in the meantime? Do we check out and ignore the talks (as it looks like ReTx does)? What is the benefit from that? At best we get a lousy experience at church and at worst we offend the speakers who may notice that we didn’t pay attention. Shouldn’t I then suggest that there are ways of getting something out of the talks even when they aren’t well prepared or are simple regurgitations of GC talks? I agree that we see the same problem. But unless you are in the bishopric or can persuade the bishopric to act differently, how does your solution give you or I any immediate benefit? At least with my solution we get something out of church now. By all means continue to complain — to those who can make the necessary changes. I don’t think I have ever suggested here that changes shouldn’t be made or that things couldn’t be better. Instead, I’m trying to help provide a way to mitigate the effects now. I hope to address the issue of responsibility in Monday’s post.” Aug 9, 00:16
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “KLC while I’m old enough to remember him, I hadn’t noticed that he did that — likely because I wasn’t listening closely enough then. I hope I have changed for the better. You said: “Basing a talk on a general conference address is so much different than literally reading that talk. I can read the talk on my own anytime I want to. I don’t need someone to stand up in sacrament meeting and read it to me.” Again, I don’t think I’ve heard anyone do that. But, to the extent that is happening, as I said above, I don’t think you or I can do much about it. Your choices are to check out, or find a way to get something out of it. What are you suggesting should be done?” Aug 9, 00:01
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “PWS said: “The address is already in a format that seems appropriate for a talk or lesson, so it doesn’t seem to need as much work to make it fit the occasion. I also think our current culture of prophet worship makes it harder for some traditional members to think it’s acceptable to make any changes at all to something said in conference.” I think these are both good points. Scripture often needs interpretation, since it was almost always written for a different time and culture. GC talks need less of that. When speakers don’t do more than parrot the GC talk, I agree that’s not ideal. I’m not seeing much of that, but that doesn’t mean its not happening elsewhere.” Aug 8, 23:56
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: ““The only option that any of us (who aren’t speaking or who aren’t leaders) have is to change ourselves and how we think about what we hear.” It’s actually not. That people are choosing a third option (phones, etc) is the entire problem is. If it was as easy as you said to find the needed engagement in the current set-up, more people would be doing it. Because they are the very people who are present and want a meaningful experience. Personally, my biggest problem is the lack of visual stimuli. I’m soooo not an auditory person. I’ve found that bringing something to do with my hands allows my busy-brain to be occupied so that the auditory part of me can listen. But doing small projects sitting in the church pews kills my back, so I had to give that up. I’ve found that I tend to be able to listen better to speakers who modulate their voices – which is an unfair ask as most speakers are still working on the terror part of public-speaking. Interestingly, I don’t seem to retain much either way. I can’t tell you who spoke last Sunday, other than it was a great speaker who did understand how to use their voice. And as I write this, it occurs to me that the reason I don’t retain is because the sacrament meeting is kind of irrelevant to me and my spirituality. I do remember several of my morning devotionals from this week (which are of course, written and thus visual).” Aug 8, 18:53
- on A “Great Work” in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 8/2: “Kent, c’mon man. First, you’re badly misconstruing my point about the audience. To be very clear, I said that blaming the audience for not being raised in a culture that is prepared to do the heavy lifting you want them to do is not a helpful criticism. Your response to that was to suggest I was somehow accusing you of of the position that “it’s their fault that the talks aren’t good.” That’s clearly not what I wrote. Second, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. In the very first sentence of your reply to me, you claim to not be “blaming the audience” and in the very next sentence you say “I AM asking the audience to take responsibility for their actions.” Maybe you don’t recognize it as such, but that is definitely blaming the audience for not engaging with a boring talk. Ultimately, we see the same problem, but we have very different opinions on what the solution should be. I also happen to think that my proposed solution is the more workable solution. Do we need to limit who speaks? I think that bishoprics can certainly be more intentional about whom they select for a given topic, but I don’t think we have to artificially limit who gets to speak, especially if leadership provides training and emphasis on becoming a better speaker.” Aug 6, 19:21
