- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Old-Timer wrote:
I know enough members who suffer from serious anxiety issues associated with public speaking that reading their own talk is an incredible example of faith and courage I rarely, if ever, meet.
Agreed, but that should be the exception, not the rule. For example, years ago, I was in a ward with a young man who stuttered his way through the sacrament prayer. It was rough, but everyone in the congregation knew it was difficult for him, and was accepting and accommodating of him. Imagine, though, if the rest of the priests in the church just started doing it in this way for no particular reason, other than that they had seen others do it and every sacrament meeting everywhere had people without maladies that acted like they had them.So yes, sometimes when people read their talks, I get it and I can even find it more compelling than it might otherwise be, but the ratio is way out of proportion. The vast majority of people that read their talks are perfectly capable of not reading their talks, and simply do it that way because of some notion that that is the ‘right’ way.
As for the example:
Reflexzero wrote:Well, this is all they do in General Conference, read their talks off the Teleprompter.
Yes, so does the President for the State of the Union, but that doesn’t make it right in a less formal setting. To take it to the other extreme, you wouldn’t read off a teleprompter when praying, talking to your kids about sex, asking a girl on a date. The missionary discussions used to be 100% memorized, start to finish. The church has worked very hard to get away from that to make it more individualized, and that speaks volumes to me.The fact is that GC talks are prepared ahead of time out of necessity. For one, there is a time constraint. I remember, years ago, Vaughn J. Featherstone gave a talk in which he had more words than time, so he just turned up the accelerator to 11 and blasted through the hole thing, hardly taking a breath. For another, the talks are now translated and delivered LIVE in many non-English languages. Tough to do that if the speaker is not going off a script. This has been going on since 1961, and is now done in over 90 languages, simultaneously.
The way our ward sets up topics and speakers is purely the province of the bishop — he doesn’t get directions on this from the SP or higher up (at least as far as I can tell). When a new edition of the Conference Ensign comes out we sit down and map out six months worth of topics. The Conference talk is not meant as a script, per se, but rather we select a theme for the meeting that the GC talk addresses. I had noticed, however, that when given a GC talk as a part of their speaking assignment, quite a few people would simply read large blocks of the GC talk and say amen. I happen to think that’s not a good way of giving a public sermon, so I changed the way we phrase our invitations. It goes something like this: Quote:Dear Brother/Sister XXXXXXX, the bishop invites you to be the first/second/third speaker in Sacrament Meeting on XX April 2013. Please plan on speaking for 8/10/12 minutes. The theme of the meeting is “Serving Others.” As you prepare your talk on this theme, please read Matthew 25:30-41 as well as the talk “First Observe, then Serve” by Sister XXXXXXXXXX from the most recent General Conference. Please do not simply re-state the Conference talk in your own talk. The Conference talk and scripture are intended to get you in spirit of the meeting’s theme. Please incorporate the scriptures, the words of living and past prophets, and your own experiences into your talk.
While we do occassionally still have someone who just regurgitates large chunks of the GC talk, the frequency of this has gone down.
Well I’ve been around long enough to endure way too many endless rambling circular talks, where the person and the subject material was unfocused, and it is painful. So that is one extreme. If you are waiting until the last minute to be guided by the spirit in your talk, I feel for the most part, the pulpit is too late. Then there are those with some notes and the gift of gab, and those with fully prepared written talks. I think as long as it is presented in an engaging way, it doesn’t matter if it is notes or written out.
Personally, I can write the way I speak, and know how to research, and I feel it helps me deliver better talks that are on topic and to the point. Many years of television and production work probably augments that capability.
I don’t see any point in trying to minister, as the saints aren’t interested in hearing things they feel they are already experts at.
Reflexzero wrote:I’ve been around long enough to endure way too many endless rambling circular talks, where the person and the subject material was unfocused, and it is painful. So that is one extreme. If you are waiting until the last minute to be guided by the spirit in your talk, I feel for the most part, the pulpit is too late.
Then there are those with some notes and the gift of gab, and those with fully prepared written talks.
Well, I disagree that not reading a talk is the same as making it up as you go, just using your gift of gab to fill in the spaces around your notes, or being guided by the spirit at the pulpit. Of course I want “fully prepared” talks… I just prefer that they don’t read the talks.It’s fine that others don’t mind reading talks in that way, if you are OK with it, good for you… I’m not going to try to convince you to hate it. For me, it’s a major part of what makes for “stale sacrament meetings”.
I would say stale sacrament comes from a lot of places. A talk on home teaching is probably better as a lesson in priesthood than a talk that in sacrament meeting really doesn’t apply to 2/3 of the audience. Dreary dirge hymns, and endless announcements are another. But most of all I don’t feel we really emphasize a worship service, it instead reminds me of a business seminar or a sales meeting. Increase production, reduce expenses, leverage assets, recover lost investments, and buy more of our own products. Endure to the end of sacrament meeting is a real experience.
Yeah, I agree, and great way to put it. Like I said on a long ago post on this thread, I would love to have the Sacrament at the end of the meeting, with all the activity leading up to it… talks about worship and celebration of the atonement… then partake of the bread of life and living water as the focusing act of the meeting. We call it “Sacrament Meeting” but really the sacrament is just a side-note between the announcements and the talks, which are rarely and only coincidentally connected to the sacrament. It might be a bit self-serving, since I only attend SM, but a shorter meeting would also be welcome.
I agree that SM is supposed to be a worship service, and not understanding what that really means in the biggest problem most leaders have when it comes to making the meeting what it is supposed to be. I also would love to have the sacrament last, with everything leading to and pointing toward it – and there is nothing in the handbook itself that forbids that structure. I’ve seen it happen, very rarely, and it’s wonderful.
I was thinking about this while getting ready for work, and really, besides the actual sacrament, nothing goes on at church on Sunday that I couldn’t accomplish just as well at home. Listen to a hymn, research a topic or two of moral value and personal interest, read the teachers manual for a lesson, maybe read an article, and done.
No fuel burned, no clogged up aisles between the pews and no need to swat away social butterflies.
Quote:besides the actual sacrament, nothing goes on at church on Sunday that I couldn’t accomplish just as well at home.
Please don’t take this wrong, but I agree – if it’s all about me. It hasn’t been primarily about me for a long time, so most of what I experience at church can’t be accomplished just as well at home.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.