- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I need to vent bit here. I got back from STake Conference a couple hours ago. My daughter was asked to speak, so I went with my whole family across town to the Stake Center. Naturally, the highlight was my daugther speaking, who, at 12 sounds like an adult and always seems to get a good response. However, it was like an excruciating operation for my son and I. I determined to sit through it since Stake Conference isn’t something I’ve made a habit for my kids. When we arrived, my son said “How long is this?”. I replied “two hours”. He whimpered and then started crying as he put his head in my lap. He is eight years old.
After my daughter spoke, I took him out of the meeting as I’ve been doing in Sacrament meeting lately, and I gave him a lesson on how to give a talk — he gave a talk on Lego brick building to me after constructing one one using the introduction- point-reason-example-conclusion model. And then we played with legos and returned for the final speaker.
One the way home, in an effort to curb my unpleasant thoughts about the boredom of the meeting, I asked my wife what the take-aways were from the remaining adult speakers she listened to. She was silent. I asked again…she was silent. Finally, after I pressed she said “I can’t remember anything they said that touched me”. That was my impression too for the parts I heard.
Anyway, I left frustrated…happy that my daughter’s talk was so well received by so many people. But frustrated with the fact that in my lifetime our organization may well never be enlightened about how to hold a conference in a way that is truly meaningful to a large group of people.
Why can’t we have a short opening talk from the SP to set the tone, and then break-out sessions in smaller groups on topics that are meaningful to people — so they can choose? With workshop leaders who are among the very best in our Stake for a change? If there is not enough room capacity, then you can still use the chapel as overflow and you can continue to have speakers in that section so everyone gets something…
We talked about this on the way home, and my daughter said “But if no one signs up for a particular session, the speaker will feel bad!”. My reply was that this is not a big issue — what matters is that the members are strengthened, and if they choose not to go to a particular workshop/break-out session, then the presenter will get the message that what they decided to speak on was not perceived as relevant by the people attending. In fact, the thought occurred to me that this structure would definitely put power in the hands of the members to voice what is truly meaningful, and what is not — by voting with their feet and their attendance within that particular workshop.
Anyway, one one hand, I feel that I’m being a bad parent in voicing my concerns in the car after the frustration mounted, but I’m growing more and more concerned that our leadership is so ingrained in the belief that you can hold a good conference by simply picking a few talk topics off the top of your head, and expect to get mass benefits from it.
Why can’t we run a conference like a true conference where there is choice and people come away TRULY UPLIFTED on a large scale?
SD, I think when a talk is uplifting and the spirit is right, even a meeting with several hundred people can be rewarding. I do sympathize though. Stake conference is probably my least favorite meeting (especially when my children were young!) My son’s a teenager and it still exasperates him that the meeting is two hours long.
I think our conferences are based upon giving direction from the leadership directly to the rank and file. For the lay member, the opposite side of the coin on this is to receive instruction directly from those that we sustain as “X” (implying special conduits to God’s wisdom). I had always thought that conferences could serve to dissipate regional or congregational differences and minimize the personal followings of particularly charismatic bishops etc. Somewhat of a reminder that, even when we worship in “the church” from week to week, we are still part of “The Church” or the Global Church.
I don’t know, SD. I attended a Catholic Mass a couple weeks ago. They’ve been around a lot longer than us, and their meetings are not any more exciting. Being uplifted in meetings is like finding joy in life. We constantly strive for it, but they come in small doses over periods of time, with lots of tough times in between. Its unrealistic to think church will uplift you all 3 hours every week (or 2hrs of SC). But it is nice when it happens, and often worth the wait.
I think Stake Conference is to try to teach adults to strive to listen for things that apply to us even if a lot of the messages don’t, and the kids learn sometimes you just have to do things you don’t want to do, like sit quietly for 2 hours and draw. Good lessons for both, but also not something that is most important in my life (in full disclosure…we slept in and skipped ours).
I’ve had great ones, really good ones, good ones, mediocre ones, bad ones and really bad ones – probably on a fairly standard bell curve. I’ve had more that were a variety of multiple designations (and occasionally pretty much all the designations) than could be classified in only one way. I’ve heard more mediocre-great talks than bad-horrible talks – and the ratio probably isn’t very close, even if there were more mediocre-good talks than really good-great talks. I view it kind of like I view my high school classes and the blessings I’ve given in my life:
I’m willing to put up with the bad AND the merely good in order to experience the great and the paradigm-altering — even if the ratio is 9:1 or higher. I don’t expect a better ratio, so I’m not disappointed – at least, not in the aggregate.
Old-Timer wrote:I’m willing to put up with the bad AND the merely good in order to experience the great and the paradigm-altering — even if the ratio is 9:1 or higher. I don’t expect a better ratio, so I’m not disappointed – at least, not in the aggregate.
See, what I get from this statement, which is disheartening, is that if we are to be happy with these experiences, we need to have low standards. How depressing!!
No, SD – what I’m saying is that we can’t expect meetings where lay people speak to be full of amazing talks. We should expect a wide array of skills – and a number of things that just don’t apply or appeal to us. That’s not depressing to me; it’s reality – and charitable. I don’t have low expectations, overall. What I said is that I don’t expect mind-blowing, superb discourses most of the time, so I’m not disappointed when they only happen occasionally.
I am a very good public speaker. It’s a strength and a natural gift. Most people aren’t like that, and the only ways to change that are to give them chances to learn. So, I put up with “merely good” talks most of the time and thoroughly enjoy the ones that rock my spiritual world.
Oh, and I know people who weren’t inspired much by talks I’ve given, despite my ability in that area. I don’t think it’s depressing that they have to accept me as a speaker to experience the ones that really stir their souls.
I do listen hard for whatever does speak to me in conference. I have to say, exchanging 3 hours of meetings for 4 hours of stake conference (both Sat & Sun sessions) is a tall order. I find that quality often exists in an inverse relationship to quantity. So there is something to be said for changing this format. I really enjoyed our stake conference last Saturday. It seemed far above average. Very interesting speakers (only one or two that really didn’t appeal to me). Our uber-orthodox SP was even toned way down and charitable which was nice. Usually my own frame of mind does have an impact. There’s a line in the movie La Femme Nikita when someone (maybe Anne Bancroft) says calmly after witnessing a brutal murder right in front of her: “Well, I never did mind the little things.” There’s something to this kind of detachment from what bothers us. We can find the good without letting the bad affect us personally.
hawkgrrrl wrote:There’s something to this kind of detachment from what bothers us. We can find the good without letting the bad affect us personally.
I remember my first wife telling me about one of her mission companions. The woman sounded crazy in every sense of the word but when I asked my wife why she didn’t complain about her she just said that she figured what they were doing, i.e. preaching the gospel, was just more important. Sometimes it just comes down to that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.