Shaming people that find church boring

[Anonymous]

I can’t help but smirk a bit when I hear comments about how some leaders are telling other people how they should feel during talks, lessons, or church…shaming them and putting blame of the victim, sort of talk.

I find it more productive for leaders to radiate the joy of their discovery, rather than tell others what they should believe or how they should feel during a sermon. It either inspires, or it does not. Telling the uninspired they need to have a better attitude is as good as telling the depressed to stop being sad.

However….I love some of these quotes…because I think it can help me know how to respond to others on some valid points to me…for example:

Quote:

Dean M. Davies, The Blessings of Worship wrote:

My brothers and sisters, spiritual experiences have less to do with what is happening around us and everything to do with what is happening within our hearts. It is my witness that true worship will transform ordinary Church meetings into extraordinary spiritual feasts. It will enrich our lives, broaden our understanding, and strengthen our testimonies. For as we incline our hearts to God, like the ancient Psalmist, we “enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: [we are] thankful unto him, and bless his name.

…you see, bishop…I am following the council of the leaders when I skip church and go to the mountains for my feast of spiritual experiences and feeling close to God. Because it is less about what is happening around us, more about where my heart is.

Just as I can turn a boring talk into a good thing with how I think about God…I can turn a nice hike with my dog into a good spiritual experience and talk with God.

Perhaps I am taking things out of context for the point they are making…but…I don’t think they can have it both ways. Either make the church meetings worthy of the spirit, or stop telling me that I can only experience the spirit in church.

The other thing I think they should be able to do, is call a spade a spade. Sometimes church is boring. We don’t have to always make it something it is not. Some people are doing the best they can. That is fine…I don’t have to call it spiritual. I just try to support and sustain others and show kindness, hoping that others do the same when it is my turn to teach.

Shaming comes in when we start suggesting we “should” always have spiritual experiences each sunday, or we “should” make it spiritual even when it is not. I often hate “shoulds”.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

…

Quote:

Dean M. Davies, The Blessings of Worship wrote:

My brothers and sisters, spiritual experiences have less to do with what is happening around us and everything to do with what is happening within our hearts. It is my witness that true worship will transform ordinary Church meetings into extraordinary spiritual feasts. It will enrich our lives, broaden our understanding, and strengthen our testimonies. For as we incline our hearts to God, like the ancient Psalmist, we “enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: [we are] thankful unto him, and bless his name.

…you see, bishop…I am following the council of the leaders when I skip church and go to the mountains for my feast of spiritual experiences and feeling close to God. Because it is less about what is happening around us, more about where my heart is.

Just as I can turn a boring talk into a good thing with how I think about God…I can turn a nice hike with my dog into a good spiritual experience and talk with God.

Perhaps I am taking things out of context for the point they are making…but…I don’t think they can have it both ways. Either make the church meetings worthy of the spirit, or stop telling me that I can only experience the spirit in church. …

I was thinking the same thing when I was reading what you quoted. Or to put it another way, if I like High Church and feel closer to God when I go to a Catholic Cathedral then should I just go there if that helps me daydream more God-like thought.

I also have to comment, “Dang – some people are getting a LOT more sleep than I am.” I don’t know about you guys, but I fight staying wake. And it is odd that after church I always need a nap to recuperate.

[Anonymous]

LookingHard wrote:

if I like High Church and feel closer to God when I go to a Catholic Cathedral then should I just go there if that helps me daydream more God-like thought.

…[back peddling LDS leader says]…

Quote:

that wasn’t what I meant. I meant to say you have to be in church. Our church. The real church. The other spiritual experiences in those cold catholic buildings or out in nature are just false spirits tricking you to make you feel good and close to God.

Bored in our church is still better than spiritually fed in others.

Good. Better. Best.

Good is in a cold church pretending to get spiritually fed.

Better is always mormon churches, even if you’re bored.

Best is mormon church convincing yourself it is an awesome place to be and you can’t imagine anyone not loving the whole 3 hours.

You can choose which you want. Stars, moon, or sun. It’s up to you where you want to spend eternity. I hope you’ll join me in the Sun group.

Quote:

We tread a path covered with diamonds, but we can scarcely distinguish them from ordinary pebbles.

Heber13 [in a snarky mood today]:…hm. :think: or else, to be honest, I mostly see pebbles, to be honest. Other people tell me they see diamonds there, but I actually haven’t seen them. So…do I just pretend to see diamonds so I can fit in? Is that the strategy?

I’ll go up to the mountains and see what God tells me about it.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

dande48 wrote:

Take a look at General Authorities… have you ever noticed how they all speak the same? Using the same inflections, the same wording, quoting a third source, sharing personal stories… They learned that. There are courses and books out there which tell them EXACTLY how to speak, because those methods have been proven to be effective. That’s not to say they don’t speak with the full intention of being led by the Spirit, or speak genuinely for our welfare. But I have no doubt many of them are in there position, while others of just as noble of Spirit are not, largely because they learned how to speak, influence, and persuade.

What I don’t understand about this is that I think the GAs are modeling for us (and I think they think that too) but so many people don’t get it. One of my first talks after returning to church someone came up to me afterward and said something like “That was just like a talk we’d hear in General Conference.” In my mind I said “And your point is…?” Out loud I just said thank you. Since then I do occasionally make note that I follow the pattern set by our leaders in the way I write and deliver my talks. It seems to matter little.

These statements reminded me of a great Sunstone article on speech patterns and how they form ritual elements of Mormonism through testimony bearing. It is all about the anthropologist perspective.

Quote:

To some of us this speech pattern may often sound quite

dull and dry, but it does key people to the movement of the

Spirit. I call this “spiritual speech” because the style also

typifies how general authorities give talks, in that very same

rhythmic, leveled, toned way, dropping down at the end. Most

Mormons can reproduce the style, and probably do when they

bear testimony, and usually they are not conscious of doing it.

We are native performers, experts, and do it unawares. I am

surprised when I discover myself reproducing the style.

Since not everyone performs this ritual with the same skill,

the bearing of testimony can also function as a social diacritic.

In some ways the skill of bearing testimony helps to separate

the weak from the strong. Our ritual performance skill very

clearly indicates–indexes–to other members the quality of

our belonging, the quality of our personal testimony. If one

were to analyze the social hierarchy of almost any ward, she

would probably find that the individuals who are best at

performing ritual speech are also those who occupy important

positions in the hierarchy. They will be the ones in the ward

who have tremendous prestige and are recognized for their

spirituality. This indexing is necessary among any social group.

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/081-20-27.pdf

[Anonymous]

Responding to the opening post…

This is EXACTLY what ticks me off about the church. When there are glaring problems within the church, the leaders tend to place the onus on the members to just buck up and enjoy it, or adapt to the circumstances. Why aren’t we hearing talks on how to engage people when speaking? Given how much speaking exists in our church, then why don’t we dedicate time to lessons on “Gospel Speaking”??? Instead, we get a guilt trip/shaming exercise instead. We also get Pollyanaism where concerns members express about the boring nature of our meetings are met with disagreement – that Sacrament meeting is a “glorious, beautiful experience”.

I wish they would take the feedback seriously and recognize that no amount of shaming or Polyannaism will address the quality of our meetings.

it took a few decades to figure out how to improve gospel teaching — the teachers council — I would love to see the church produce materials on how to speak well, how to use simple rhetorical devices, how to speak with the spirit (consciously, not as something that ‘just happens’), and how to make meetings engaging.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

It is my witness that true worship will transform ordinary Church meetings into extraordinary spiritual feasts.

I would be interested to have someone explain to me what true worship looks like in the Mormon context. Is it true worship to be anxiously engaged and doing my duty? Is doing HT or filling out a tithing slip true worship? Even the sacrament meeting and the sacrament seem not very worshipful in the traditional sense of the word.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know if the things we do are worship as much as how we are feeling and wanting to show God our devotion through many different things…like taking the sacrament or praying or doing stuff we associate with showing that to him.

LDS.org says:

Quote:

To worship God is to give Him our love, reverence, service, and devotion. The Lord commanded Moses, “Worship God, for him only shalt thou serve” (Moses 1:15). He has also commanded, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy might, mind, and strength; and in the name of Jesus Christ thou shalt serve him” (D&C 59:5). Worship not only shows our love for God and commitment to Him, it gives us strength to keep His commandments. Through worship we grow in knowledge and faithfulness. If we place any person or thing above the love of God, we worship that thing or person. This is called idolatry (see Exodus 20:3-6).

[Anonymous]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

For those who are interested, I threw this into a blog post this morning: https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/10/17/when-church-is-boring/#more-83179

I posted this over there in response.

I have been teaching GD for the last three years and all I can say is that you can’t teach the lessons as written and make them interesting. Here’s an example from last weeks lesson, #37:

Quote:

•When the destruction ceased, the earth was covered with thick darkness (3 Nephi 8:19–23). Why is total darkness an appropriate sign for the death of the Savior? (See 3 Nephi 9:18; see also John 8:12; D&C 11:28.) In what ways has the Savior brought light to your life?

•What was the reaction of those who survived the destruction? (See 3 Nephi 8:23–25.) How can reading about their experience help us prepare for the Second Coming?

Questions like that out of the blue are guaranteed to only return blank stares. All you can do is take the references and make something up and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. I routinely use outside material but I don’t reference anything and don’t bring in books or any other printed materials. A year and a half ago the general SS President came for a meeting and said that new lessons are coming but nothing yet. We have a new once a month program, Teaching the Savior’s Way, and it’s something but not enough. The church seems to want the lessons tightly focused possibly to avoid speculation but the way it’s going now it’s not sustainable even for someone with a good attitude.

[Anonymous]

GBSmith: I saw that comment, and I was thinking “Wow, those are some brain dead questions” when our teacher asked them. He sticks to the manual, well, religiously. There’s no forethought, post-thought or thought at all. But sometimes we have snacks. The lessons are simply terrible. I am not sure why they are so bad, but utter lack of intellectual curiosity from him and the ward members seems to be a big missing piece of the puzzle compared to my last ward. The questions in the manual are definitely not engaging, fresh, or thought-provoking. Oy vey!

[Anonymous]

Quote:

When the destruction ceased, the earth was covered with thick darkness (3 Nephi 8:19–23). Why is total darkness an appropriate sign for the death of the Savior? (See 3 Nephi 9:18; see also John 8:12; D&C 11:28.) In what ways has the Savior brought light to your life?

•What was the reaction of those who survived the destruction? (See 3 Nephi 8:23–25.) How can reading about their experience help us prepare for the Second Coming?

These are very boring, scripted questions. I do our Teacher’s Council, and last time we met, I commented that if they, as teachers find the questions boring, so will the audience — don’t use them, I said — if you don’t feel excited to ask the questions.

Then I gave them some simple passages from the text-dense manuals for HP/Eq/RS, and asked them to REVERSE ENGINEER questions from the “answer” given in the dense text.

I was surprised at how hard it was for these people. Many of them had university education from a first tier university near our Ward, but it took them a long time to come up with questions to the point I thought I’d missed their level when I gave them the exercise. At one point, i asked “Is what I’m asking too hard or unclear??” and they said “No — we are just thinking”….

I saw how hard it is for the average member to come up with engaging questions. So, when they were struggling, I gave them template questions they can use such as

“What is the relationship between [this and that]”

“What is the difference between [give two concepts that seem very similar, but are in fact different]”.

“What is the impact of [insert something here related to the lesson]”

“How do you [insert practical objective here, like ‘create an engaging FHE’]”.

“How would you define the term [insert concept here, like opposition]”.

One of the people went to the board and took a picture of the generic kinds of questions I had written on the board and others were writing them down. Then they came out with some really good questions that make people think, and that are not lame. One question was “What is the impact of spirituality on relationships?”. I was proud of them.

So, part of the reason the lessons are so boring is that the people who make up the official, correlated materials create the lamest questions..,

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

Quote:

It is my witness that true worship will transform ordinary Church meetings into extraordinary spiritual feasts.

I would be interested to have someone explain to me what true worship looks like in the Mormon context. Is it true worship to be anxiously engaged and doing my duty? Is doing HT or filling out a tithing slip true worship? Even the sacrament meeting and the sacrament seem not very worshipful in the traditional sense of the word.

Simple. True worship is when you feel like meetings at church are extraordinary spiritual feasts.

[Author]

Posts