I hope Sacrament Meetings get better.

Except for announcements my ward has been pretty similar. I heard the music leader complain about the intermediate hymn/special music recently. She’s not opposed to them and says she likes them but she pointed out that every time there is one (which is most weeks) we go over. I’m not so sure that’s as much a problem with the hymn, rather it seems to be the speakers and/or bishopric. For example yesterday we had two speakers (husband and wife) and the second speaker (husband) had a good 15 minutes after the musical number. His wife had not taken more than that herself. I think 15 minutes in SM is a pretty good amount of time considering most people probably aren’t listening after the first few minutes. Yet he went over, although not as much as some recent speakers who have also had about 15 minutes have. My take on it is that the bishopric needs to be more clear in saying “You have X minutes.” In the ward I frequently visit there is rarely a time when they go over. Their bishop has a 3×5 card that says “Great Talk! Please wrap it up” and he’s not afraid to use it (and it’s not necessarily reserved for only the concluding speaker). There are of course multiple issues at hand – poor preparation/timing, poor instruction, and just plain being inconsiderate to name a few, but since the death of LeGrand Richards (and I loved him) a speaker going long in GC is unheard of. The thing is impeccably timed. A member of our stake presidency uses it as an example for meetings going over (which he clearly despises) – “General Conference always ends on time and nothing you have to say is more important than what the prophets and apostles have to say.”

I think The Next Mormons survey was in progress or completed when the change to two hours came. Turns out across the board (all age groups from Boomers to Millennials) would have actually gone for 45 minute sacrament meetings. I’d be good with that.

Honestly, I have never had a MP or SP show up unannounced and ask to speak. Is that common where you live?

It is real torture to see the final speaker’s eyes looking at his (or her) notes then looking at the clock & desperately

trying to figure out what to cut.

That’s much more of a planning issue on the part of the speaker, the person who asked him or her to speak, and sometimes the inconsiderate nature of someone else who took longer than he or she should have (which may also be because the person who asked him or her to speak wasn’t specific about time).

Youth speakers definitely are not explicitly excluded from the new format. We have very few youth in my ward, so we don’t regularly have youth speakers but we do at least once a month or so. Again, that’s part of the planning process – if there’s a youth speaker there’s probably not time for a rest hymn. And you have to know your youth – it’s pretty likely the 11-year-old deacon who is speaking for his first time is maybe only going to make it two minutes. Some youth give talks closer in length and depth to some adults. In my own experience the youth are much better at staying within the five minute allotted time than some adults who are given 10 minutes and take 20 and still act like they weren’t done.

Just as an aside, when the new format started we asked in high council how long we should be given now. Formerly it was 20 minutes. The stake presidency said we should plan on 15 in the new format and that has generally worked out for me and that is about what I have been getting. In my own small ward we start at 9:30. We do no (or very limited) announcements. The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is usually finished before 9:50. If you allow 5 minutes at the end for closing song and prayer, that leaves 35 minutes for speakers. We do frequently have a rest hymn or special music, but either way a rest hymn or youth speaker gives two adults 15 minutes each (or one 10 minutes and one 20 minutes). This really isn’t rocket science.

I like your 15 minute speaker and the rest for music MM. I’ve long thought sacrament meeting should be more like Music and the Spoken Word.

A big part of the problem really is beyond the bishopric’s control. They can tell someone “You have 10 minutes to talk about X” all they want, but what the person actually does is out of their control. There’s more than one reason people go long, including just not knowing how to time a talk or thinking they’ll just say whatever they have to say on the subject no matter how long it takes. Again, actually saying (or reading) the talk out loud in front of a clock helps with the timing – I do it every time. I think some bishops are too reticent to use the hook, but I’ve seen it work in the other ward I frequent.

Alas, despite all my soapboxing and spouting on this subject, my ward is not perfect. We go over most Sundays, although this past Sunday we did not. Don’t even get me started on F&TM (which I think should be eliminated BTW).

In this case, my sympathy is with the last speaker. Who wants to be in that position?

There are times when you walk out of church asking yourself, what was the point of that talk?

Because it is so chopped up.

The other point is: what does an investigator think? This after they have attended another church with professional clergy.

Clergy who run & control the “show” completely from start to finish. Plan the service, write the talk, deliver the message.

I know what you’re going to say: the membership has no investment in the service.

And you’re right. But, (the big but) there has to be a better way. I hope & pray it is only happening in my ward.

There I’m done. I have exercised the demon. Now I feel better. Thank you for you patience.

… we congratulate members of the congregation for notable achievements from the pulpit, and often summarize the high points of the various messages in the closing announcements.

We have a great ward and a BP that is willing to adjust and go “rogue” when it benefits the ward community in positive ways.

Rumin, what kinds of achievements would be noted from the pulpit? Just curious.

This past Sunday was the HC Sunday. The HC & the SP attended. The HC began the meeting by releasing a number of people from the Stake

Organizations. After the releases came the vote to sustain the new people being calling. The SP came to the podium & corrected the HC

because he was announcing the wrong members for the positions. They started over & everytime the correct names were read the HC looked

at the SP for his approval before the membership raised their collective hands. At the end of the meeting, the SP stood & formally “repented”

for the mistake because it was his email that the HC used in the first place. Needless to say, we went over the time limit again.

I know they are good men. These positions are difficult, time consuming & require long hours away from their families.

Again, I wonder what does a new member or investigator think when this occurs?

Wouldn’t inspiring meetings add to the experience though? I don’t see how that would hurt.