- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SD, if boring meetings are a constant experience and a non-boring meeting is the exception to the rule, that would be different. I really feel for people for whom that is the case, and I know it is the case in some places. However, it’s not the case in the many wards and branches I’ve attended in my lifetime. There have been plenty of boring talks and lessons and meetings, but there have been many more that were not boring. Also, I try to be VERY charitable with regard to boring talks. Many of them are given by sincere people doing their best to share, and I try not to tune out or criticize that.
One of my biggest fears as a missionary was bringing an investigator to church and being turned off by either a boring meeting, or some one going off the deep end in fast and testimony meeting. Once I understood the purpose of why Christ established a church, my perspective changed. I would teach a lesson first, about the purpose of life (to become like Heavenly Father Matt. 5:48), and how God created us in His image to become like Him. Then we would talk about how the Scriptures (God’s Word), Prayer, and Service help us to become like Him. Lastly, we would talk about one of the mission goal of the church being ‘the perfecting of the saints.” I would tell the investigator that when they come visit an lds church there is not a paid ministry and everyone participates. Little children give talks in Primary, young adults in worship meetings. Everyone has the opportunity for callings that help them grow and learn. This is why they may have to listen to a boring talk once in awhile because they are getting an opportunity to grow. I share with them my first talk at 8 years old in church and how scared I was. My lip twiched, my knees shook, and I rattled off the fastest talk that I am sure no one understood. From those scary opportunities I gained maturity and self confidence to where I became really good at teaching adult classes. With this perspective, investigators thought the church was marvelous and were patient with the boring and lack luster talks or lessons.
The one thing that was always amazing to me was how my husband and I could listen to a talk and thought it was horrible and others heard it and thought it was wondeful. I did take several teach development courses which help members become better teachers and speakers. This is needed because edifying the members is also very important.
Old-Timer wrote:SD, if boring meetings are a constant experience and a non-boring meeting is the exception to the rule, that would be different. I really feel for people for whom that is the case, and I know it is the case in some places. However, it’s not the case in the many wards and branches I’ve attended in my lifetime. There have been plenty of boring talks and lessons and meetings, but there have been many more that were not boring.
Also, I try to be VREY charitable with regard to boring talks. Many of them are given by sincere people doing their best to share, and I try not to tune out or criticize that.
Agree with that… but certainly some wards ARE more boring than others. I think small ones are the worst, since they’ve the least number of people to draw on.
SamBee wrote:It’s an easy get out clause, doesn’t explain how people and lives change.
Yes, it makes a lot of assumptions that are limited in awareness & experience.And I agree… he should listen to Uchtdorph’s talk.
SilentDawning wrote:One thing I’ve learned over the years is to rarely ever make uncategorical statements. The world is too diverse. There is always an exception. You get yourself into hot water all the time.
I have to admit, sometimes I do this, maybe we can’t help but conclude sometimes, for practical purposes.But when we really want truth & want to present truth, we must exlore possibilities & not jump to conclusions.
I have to admit, I also find the uncomfortable conclusion that while some good people leave, some bad people stay in as well. If you’ve family in the church, then you’re far more likely to stay, whatever your behavior, testimony or feelings. Sometimes I wonder if that’s why family is such a big deal in our church. Leaving and staying isn’t about being good or bad, IMHO, although you might stay or leave for good or bad reasons. I think everyone struggles, just that some people hide it better, and people react differently. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are people in the church who haven’t believed for years, and a good few people outside it, who still have a testimony of it, and love the Book of Mormon.
We had one guy leave because apparently no one talked to him. I didn’t even know who he was.
Quote:for some people it is the only logical conclusion for them
I agree with this. I think it’s actually likely that E. Hallstrom simply doesn’t have a lot of close friends or family members whose disaffection he has discussed with them. He’s explaining it based on what he sees. And I have 2 sisters who left the church for essentially this same reason. They really never believed it, committed to it, cared about it in the first place, so as soon as they were adults and could make their own choices, they did. They aren’t hostile toward the church although one has asked to have her name removed. It just wasn’t for them. They were never deeply into it. I doubt they would care enough to search the internet for reasons to doubt.
Whenever I hear preaching to the choir, it always raises my hackles. Maybe it’s important to help people feel appreciated by telling them how wonderful they are (“you people are so much more committed than those bad ones that didn’t stay”) but I tend to think that preaching to the choir does more harm than good. The choir shouldn’t be our target audience.
Meh…I never have a boring sacrament meeting either…if my mind wanders off, as it is apt too, I tend to put Tetris on silent mode and play or sometimes I get on the net and look up sports scores on my phone. I bet that’s not what Hallstrom was thinking, but I am in church right??? :thumbup: Quote:“They were never committed to the gospel in the first place”.
This sounds like a nice tidy way to explain a phenomenon which might otherwise be distressing and require one to have to think deeply.
A favorite line from the play
Wicked: Quote:There are precious few at ease with moral ambiguities, so they act as though they don’t exist.
Hallstrom’s comment seems like an example of this.
You might also argue that in simply blaming the members who become dissaffected for “not having a testimony in the first place” that it nullifies any obligation for the active members to take a hard look at themselves and the Church for ways they might improe, or how they might be unconsciously contributing to such dissaffection. THAT might be too threatening in the only true Church on the face of the earth which in the minds of many traditional believers, can do little wrong. The fact that people like Hallstrom is quite comfortable with such a judgmental and blanket statement shows that in that respect, he’s blind. However, we’re blind too, I guess.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
Whenever I hear preaching to the choir, it always raises my hackles. Maybe it’s important to help people feel appreciated by telling them how wonderful they are (“you people are so much more committed than those bad ones that didn’t stay”) but I tend to think that preaching to the choir does more harm than good. The choir shouldn’t be our target audience.Yes, and that encourages spiritual pride, which is a form of sin.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.