- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
My husband just got back from a High Priests Group Presidency meeting; he is the secretary. We have very few deacons in our ward, and on most Sundays, the sacrament ends up being passed by a couple of deacons and a half dozen or so high priests. When my husband came home after the meeting tonight, he said that one of the counselors in the presidency mentioned that he noticed, while passing the sacrament last week, that quite a few members took it with their LEFT HAND!!!!! 😮 He said that the members need to be informed how wrong this is. My husband spoke up (I can always count on him
😳 In the end, the group president told the member of the presidency who was going to be conducting in High Priests meeting on Sunday that that he could make an announcement reminding the high priests about this so-called “rule” but that he should bring something of an “official” nature to back up the statement.Well, when my husband told me this, I just about went ballistic. Sometimes I really hate my lack of self-control, but it is what it is. This kind of legalism just annoys the hell out of me. I told my husband that I’d do my best to find any “official” sources that say it really doesn’t matter what hand you take the sacrament with. I thought it would be easier than it’s turning out to be. I know that Joseph Fielding Smith said we should take it with our right hand, but I also know that on the lds.org, in the Newsroom article called, “Approaching Mormon Doctrine,” it says:
•Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.To me, that’s good enough. If it were important which hand we take the Sacrament with, we would find it in the scriptures. It’s not there. Period. Furthermore, it’s not in the section of the Bishop’s Handbook on the Sacrament either. As a matter of fact, the Handbook says:
From this blog post: http://mormonnerd.com/do-you-have-to-take-the-sacrament-with-your-right-hand/
Quote:Elder Russell M. Nelson perhaps said it best: “Much more important than concern over which hand is used in partaking of the sacrament is that the sacrament be partaken with a deep realization of the atoning sacrifice that the sacrament represents.”
And even more on point:
Quote:President Joseph Fielding Smith warned of customs creeping into commandments. He said:
“These changes and innovations are innocently adopted, but in course of time there is the danger that they will become fixed customs and considered as necessary to the welfare of the Church. For example, let us consider the ordinance of the Sacrament. It became the custom in many wards throughout the church to have the young men who passed the Sacrament all dressed alike with dark coats, white shirts and uniform ties. This could in time lead to the established custom of dressing them in uniform, such as we see done in some sectarian and other churches. Then again as they passed the Sacrament they had to stand with their left hand plastered on their backs in a most awkward manner. The priests or elders who administered these holy emblems had to stand in a certain way as the one officiating in the prayer knelt at the table. In some instances the Bishop stood in the pulpit with raised hands in an attitude of benediction. Other customs among the quorums and in the services of the wards were introduced. Members of the Church were instructed that they must not touch the trays containing the bread and the water with their left hand, but must take it in their right hand after partaking as their neighbor held the tray in his or her right hand. In the Priesthood in the wards, we now have “supervisors” directing the activities of the deacons and the priests. How long will it take before these supervisors are considered as a regular part of the Priesthood and it will be necessary to set them apart or ordain them to this office? So we see that we, if we are not careful, will find ourselves traveling the road that brought the Church of Jesus Christ in the first centuries into disrepute and paved the way for the apostasy.”
Although, hey, that pretty much describes how it is now. In fact, I have actually heard the phrase “the uniform of the priesthood” used. In our ward, the boys all wear a white shirt and dark suit jacket, which let me tell you is expensive as a mother of boys. The deacon’s jacket isn’t the priest’s jacket, and there’s about a foot of growing in between!
There are cultures that consider the left hand the “unclean” hand because it’s the hand used to wash oneself after going to the bathroom. So think of that the next time you are passing the sacrament tray.
From a 1988 David B. Haight talk:
Quote:Avoiding Formalism. Since the administration of President Heber J. Grant, the First Presidency has emphasized the precaution through the General Handbook of Instructions to
avoidanyformalism , or uniformity in procedures. These instructions apply to the dress of Aaronic Priesthood youth who pass the sacrament. Boys should be neat and clean, but not required to dress uniformly. It also refers to any formalism, such as Aaronic Priesthood young men walking with one arm behind their back, or standing with arms folded, or priests raising their arm to the square when blessing the sacrament. This is one that I would get before the bishop and first ask him, “If someone was about to declare something as solid doctrine that was not according to the Q12, would you want to know about it and nip it in the bud?” I am sure he is going to say yes. Then pass on what you have heard along with the quotes provided here and let him handle it. I do know that the bishop’s copy of the church handbook of instructions no long says that you no longer ask to “raise the RIGHT hand”, it just says “raised hand.” So you might ask the Bishop to check that to also mention that you can indicate your sustaining with the left hand if you want (I do every time to nudge the issue).
I’m with LH on this one, I would bring it to the attention of the bishop. OTOH, our previous namby pamby bishop wouldn’t have done anything anyway, I’m not sure about the current one (although one of his counselors certainly would). The sacrament is one of those areas where it is particularly easy to become Pharisaical. Our ward is good, we don’t have enough AP to do the sacrament and boys and men often wear shirts that aren’t white – in fact I’d go as far as to say there’s never a week where they all wear white shirts. I do take the sacrament with my right hand, but I do that because I’m right handed.
Love those quotes, Hawkgrrrl.
My father-in-law believed strongly that the sacrament was a right-hand ordinance. I loved him, anyway.
🙂 I also would bring it to the attention of my Bishop or Stake Presidency. It simply is wrong – and anyone who really thinks about its implications would understand.
You guys are great! Thanks for all of the answers I’ve got so far. I think I am going to suggest to my husband that he talk to the bishop and give him a heads up that this “doctrine” is about to be declared to the high priests group. Knowing my bishop, he’d want to know. If there are any more comments from General Authorities, please post them!
Old-Timer wrote:My father-in-law believed strongly that the sacrament was a right-hand ordinance.
I loved him, anyway.
🙂
If someone feels it is important for them, go for it. I hope it helps them feel closer to God.But it is quite a big leap from that to telling everyone else that it MUST BE THIS WAY.
hawkgrrrl wrote:There are cultures that consider the left hand the “unclean” hand because it’s the hand used to wash oneself after going to the bathroom. So think of that the next time you are passing the sacrament tray.
The following is from wikipedia
Quote:Historically, the left side, and subsequently left-handedness, was considered negative. The word “left” itself derives from the Anglo-Saxon word lyft, “weak”.[4] In Ancient Greek both words meaning “left” were euphemisms: the word ἀριστερός, aristerós (the standard word in Modern Greek as well) is derived from ἂριστος, áristos, “best”, and the word εὺώνυμος, euōnymos, “of good name”, is another euphemism used in lieu of “ill-named”. The Latin adjective sinister/sinistra/sinistrum originally meant “left” but took on meanings of “evil” or “unlucky” by the Classical Latin era, and this double meaning survives in European derivatives of Latin, and in the English word “sinister”. Alternatively, sinister comes from the Latin word sinus meaning “pocket”: a traditional Roman toga had only one pocket, located on the left side. The right hand has historically been associated with skill: the Latin word for right-handed is dexter, as in “dexterity”, meaning manual skill. Even the word “ambidexterity” reflects the bias. Its intended meaning is “skillful on both sides”. However, since it keeps the Latin root dexter, which means “right”, it ends up conveying the idea of being “right-handed on both sides”. This bias is also apparent in the lesser-known antonym “ambisinistrous”, which means “left-handed [i.e., clumsy] on both sides”.[5] In more technical contexts, “sinistral” may be used in place of “left-handed” and “sinistrality” in place of “left-handedness”.[6] In both Ancient Greek and Roman religion, auspices (usually the flight paths of birds, as observed by a bird-diviner, or augur) were thought to be unfavorable if appearing on the diviner’s left-hand side and favorable if on the right: an ancient custom mentioned in Homer’s Iliad and of apparently Middle Eastern origin (as attested in the Amarna correspondence, in which a king of Alashiya, i.e. Cyprus, requests an eagle-diviner from the Pharaoh of Egypt).
Meanings gradually developed from use of these terms in the ancient languages. In many modern European languages, including English, the word for the direction “right” also means “correct” or “proper”, and also stands for authority and justice.
In Sanskrit, the word “वाम” (waama) stands for both “left” and “wicked.”
In most Slavic languages the root prav (right) is used in words carrying meanings of correctness or justice. In colloquial Russian the word левый (levyĭ) ‘left’ means unofficial, counterfeit, strange.
In French, droit(e) (cognate to English direct) means both “right” and “straight”, as well as “law” and the legal sense of “right”, while gauche means “left” and is also a synonym of maladroit, literally “not right”, meaning “clumsy”. Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and German have similar constructs. The Spanish term diestro and the Italian term destro mean both “right-handed” and “skillful”. The contemporary Italian word sinistra has both meanings of sinister and left (the masculine adjective for sinister being sinistro), and maldestro means “clumsy”. The Spanish siniestra has both, too, although the “left” meaning is less common and is usually expressed by izquierda,[7] a Basque word that made its way into Portuguese as well. In some Spanish-speaking countries, to do something por izquierda means to engage in corrupt conduct or employ illegitimate means, whereas por derecha or a derechas means to do it the right (legitimate) way.[8] Also, in Spanish, to tell someone “Eres tan zurdo” means that they are being clumsy, though the literal meaning is “You’re so lefty.” In Portuguese, the most common word for left-handed person, canhoto, was once used to identify the devil, and canhestro, a related word, means “clumsy”.
We use the right hand out of tradition and because it is comfortable for 90% of the population. This has the effect of being passively discriminatory against left handed people.
This one is more general and does not directly address the issue but I love this quote by Pres. Uchtdorf from General Conference Oct. 2009: Quote:…there are so many “shoulds” and “should nots” that merely keeping track of them can be a challenge. Sometimes, well-meaning amplifications of divine principles—many coming from uninspired sources—complicate matters further, diluting the purity of divine truth with man-made addenda. One person’s good idea—something that may work for him or her—takes root and becomes an expectation. And gradually, eternal principles can get lost within the labyrinth of “good ideas.”
This was one of the Savior’s criticisms of the religious “experts” of His day, whom He chastised for attending to the hundreds of minor details of the law while neglecting the weightier matters.
Ugh, in searching I found more support for using your right hand. One thing is for sure, it’s not a subject that comes up officially very often. In the spirit of knowing what you’re up against:
George Albert Smith, Conference Report, April 1908 wrote:Our people have been taught to take the sacrament with the right hand; we believe that is appropriate, and proper, and acceptable to our Father. The sacrament should not be accepted with a gloved hand; nobody should receive it in that irreverent manner.
Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3 wrote:It is the custom to extend the right hand in token of fellowship. The right hand is called the dexter, and the left, the sinister; dexter means right and sinister means left. Dexter, or right, means favorable or propitious. Sinister is associated with evil, rather than good, Sinister means perverse. We take the sacrament with the right hand. We sustain the authorities with the right hand. We make acknowledgment with the right hand raised.
The quote from hawkgrrrl is also from Joseph Fielding Smith so there’s a little contradiction, for me it’s unclear what in his laundry list of customs represents things that should be continued as best practice and what is paving the way toward apostasy.
http://www.lds.org/liahona/1983/07/questions-and-answers ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.lds.org/liahona/1983/07/questions-and-answers There’s a general consensus, citing scripture, that the right hand is the “covenant hand.” Many references don’t come right out and say you can’t take the sacrament with the left hand but they do lean heavily toward “Take the sacrament with your right hand. You know… if you want to show reverence.”
[img]http://yates2.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Obi-Wan.jpg [/img] These aren’t the quotes you are looking for. But you should probably be prepared for these points to be raised. You might get more traction by visiting the church handbook, which outlines the sacrament dos and don’ts and place the burden on the person attempting to institute additional rules.
Not to derail, but back in the day I wondered why deacons were necessary to pass the sacrament. If there’s no problem with non priesthood holders passing the tray down the pew then why do we require a deacon to carry it from the table to the pew? Seems like anyone could perform that duty. I mean, if you want to get all technically bureaucratic about it maybe have the deacons shimmying down the pews or only have a priesthood holder hold the trays out for other people as the tray makes its way down the pew.
Another derail now that passing the sacrament is on my mind, I like some of the symbolism in the way other churches do their sacrament. People come up to the front of the church to partake in the sacrament. It’s a real come unto Jesus moment. Our approach is to bring Jesus to the people (missionary theme I suppose). Each method has its merits and symbolism.
I’ll occasionally take the sacrament and even do sustainings with my left hand, not out of defiance, either out of convenience or to remind myself that it’s not the most important aspect of the ritual, at least for me.
I actually have had people say that the sacrament should be passed and taken with the right hand – not very many, but not just my father-in-law. I almost always have responded by saying: Quote:So, if someone is missing their right hand, is that person not allowed to pass or take the sacrament?
Nobody agrees with that restriction, and only a one or two has tried to continue the argument. I simply smile and say to them:
Quote:So, we both agree that it is not eternal doctrine that the sacrament must or should be done with the right hand, and the handbook of instructions doesn’t say it is required or even suggested. That means it is cultural and tradition, since the vast majority of people are right-handed. If you want to take it with your right hand because that adds meaning for you, I’m cool with that. Just don’t tell my left-handed daughter that she is sinning or participating incorrectly just because she, like you, uses her dominant hand.
You are doing the exact same thing, just with different hands.Also, Deacons pass the sacrament because leaders wanted them to have something to do. The handbook makes it clear that the person who blesses the sacrament could hand it to anyone and it could be passed around the group in any way, as long as the process is respectful and doesn’t detract from the sacredness of the ordinance. Every hand that touches it other than the one who blesses it currently can be female, and they can pass it among themselves in any manner – even having one of them do what Deacons do now.
Most members don’t understand that simply because most members don’t actually think about it in any depth.
nibbler wrote:Ugh, in searching I found more support for using your right hand. One thing is for sure, it’s not a subject that comes up officially very often.
I know. I was kind of surprised to find those when I was researching the subject last night. The quotes were troublesome, simply because there were quite a number of them. Still, it just doesn’t make sense to me that we would not find this anywhere in the scriptures if it were truly doctrine. And when you hear talks in Conference about the Sacrament, never is this “rule” even mentioned.
Quote:In the spirit of knowing what you’re up against:
George Albert Smith, Conference Report, April 1908 wrote:Our people have been taught to take the sacrament with the right hand; we believe that is appropriate, and proper, and acceptable to our Father. The sacrament should not be accepted with a gloved hand; nobody should receive it in that irreverent manner.
Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3 wrote:It is the custom to extend the right hand in token of fellowship. The right hand is called the dexter, and the left, the sinister; dexter means right and sinister means left. Dexter, or right, means favorable or propitious. Sinister is associated with evil, rather than good, Sinister means perverse. We take the sacrament with the right hand. We sustain the authorities with the right hand. We make acknowledgment with the right hand raised.
The quote from hawkgrrrl is also from Joseph Fielding Smith so there’s a little contradiction, for me it’s unclear what in his laundry list of customs represents things that should be continued as best practice and what is paving the way toward apostasy.
I ran across hawkgrrrl’s quote last night on my own (the one from Joseph Fielding Smith that condemns legalism). Clearly, he felt one way at one time and another way at another time. Still “Doctrines of Salvation” is no more canonical than “Mormon Doctrine” or “The Journal of Discourses” is.
Quote:I’ll occasionally take the sacrament and even do sustainings with my left hand, not out of defiance, either out of convenience or to remind myself that it’s not the most important aspect of the ritual, at least for me.
Since I”m right-handed, I will typically take it with my right hand. However, let’s say there was a big empty space in the pew between me and the people closest to me. I might slide across the seat and meet the person who was passing the sacrament to me midway. I’d probably take the whole tray with my right hand since it’s heavy enough that I feel more confident that I won’t drop it if I’m holding it with my right hand. Then, rather than change hands, I’ll just take the Sacrament with my left hand.
The way I see it, people don’t do a very good job of thinking of two things at once. I don’t typically have to think about taking the sacrament with my right hand, but a left-hander (especially a child) would probably have to keep reminding himself that when the tray reaches him, he’s got to take the bread or water with the right hand. If he’s doing that, he’s not going to be fully focused on what he’s supposed to be focused on.
The funny thing is that in our ward this past Sunday, the Relief Society and Priesthood lesson was from the “Teachings for Our Times” lessons, i.e. the Conference talks. I taught the Relief Society one. Anyway, for all of us — men and women — it was the talk called “The Music of the Gospel.” It was about how we need to concern ourselves less with the things we “do” and more with what we “are.” The things we do were compared to “doing the dance steps” and what we are was compared to “hearing the music.” So, what I’m getting out of this whole thing that came up in my husband’s High Priests presidency meeting is that it’s critical that we not mess up the dance steps. Hearing the music is clearly secondary.
I have arthritis in both hands. Sometimes I have to take the sacrament with both hands or I run the risk of dropping it. Other than strange, what does that say about me? Frankly, I’ve never cared what others think about me or my personal customs.
Katzpur wrote:quite a few members took it with their LEFT HAND!!!!!
😮 He said that the members need to be informed how wrong this is.
I would have such little patience to have such a discussion about such a thing with anyone.If this dude wants to stand before people and make his announcement about how “wrong” it is…I would let him, but I would never participate in such announcements and would probably use my left hand every week thereafter.
Some people really like nit-picky things as a sign of importance and devotion. Let them have it. If such a thing were doctrine…that would be a stupid doctrine to me.
(Hi Katzpur! Good to see ya
:wave: )- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
