Virtual Sacrament Meeting

[Anonymous]

I was very surprised that the Church hasn’t thrown together virtual sacrament meetings and made them available online. Our mission has done this in the past. I don’t understand the reason for not doing this.

My background… I would say I am semi-inactive, going through a faith crisis since leaving the military. I have solid belief in HF and JC, but highly suspicious of organizations and esp men and their true motives. I am married to nm, raised my kids LDS, they are also inactive. Is there a real reason why the sacrament benedictions can’t be done virtually, with people at home using their own bread? I get LDS are really steeped in culture and traditions but to me, this makes sense. Could anyone tell me why it can’t be done?

I also have social anxiety and work from home in IT, and rarely go out, so self isolation is not a hardship for me! I have limited participation at church, although I have no calling, but have asked twice for one. There just aren’t any activities at our ward and not having a calling makes me feel outside of a community I already feel marginalized in.

I’m sure I’m not the only one at church like this, I’ve wondered for years why, as the Church has the technology, why don’t they make a virtual sacrament meeting available?

Please don’t say because no one would go to church. I don’t think that’s true because for many, Church is a community. That also tells me it’s all about stats and that’s a terrible reason to not make this available to so many inactive or people who struggle to attend.

[Anonymous]

I agree, there are certainly people who would not forgo SM just because there was a virtual/online option. I remember Catholic “mass for shut ins” as a child on TV (too many years ago to think about). Now there are Catholic channels where mass is available every day, multiple times per day. That doesn’t seem to stop people from going to mass. The church does seem to embrace technology (while at the same time some members vilify it) when it serves the church’s purpose. (Honestly those video stake conferences we used to be subjected to where extreme torture in my mind.) I don’t know why they won’t move in that direction for SM – but I don’t expect that to change any time soon.

[Anonymous]

I think there is possibilities from Sacrament blessings from home. Community of Christ has made this possible very recently..

Quote:

Online Participation in the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper

“Technology presents opportunities for involvement in sacraments by priesthood members

and participants in separate locations” (2019 words of counsel). This may occur in many ways.

The following principles should be observed when planning and providing online participation in

the Lord’s Supper:

1. Real-time online participation in the Lord’s Supper is considered the same as being in the

single physical location.

2. The emblems should be physically present for all those wishing to partake.

3. A priest or Melchisedec priesthood member should read the prayer(s) of blessing on the

emblems so that those in all locations experience the blessing(s) through sight and sound,

closed-captioning, or sound only. Also, participants in all locations should be encouraged

to kneel, if possible.

With all of the Priesthood that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has, I would imagine that live, in person blessings would be what they would prefer. This is where your Ministering Brothers would come into play.

[Anonymous]

JamesFromMI wrote:

With all of the Priesthood that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has, I would imagine that live, in person blessings would be what they would prefer. This is where your Ministering Brothers would come into play.

Hard to say. We also have the story of Jesus being tempted in the wilderness where the devil set Jesus on a pinnacle of the temple. “If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.”

We wouldn’t want to put people in harm’s way and expect god to bail them out.

[Anonymous]

A few months ago we had a discussion in high council about sacrament in the foyer. Just to be clear up front, our SP is fully in favor of sacrament being passed to the foyer because some people are out there with otherwise screaming kids or just got there a minute too late to enter the chapel before the prayer or (fill in the blank). He believes there’s power in the sacrament and I agree there could be even if it’s only perceived power. I think we have a good mix of people on the council, including some ultra conservatives (and yes I do worry about the loss of my unorthodox voice but I’m pleased with a name that has been put forward). One of the ultra conservatives brought up that when he was bishop he directed the sacrament not to be passed to the foyer because he couldn’t fulfill his duty as bishop in ensuring those who were unworthy weren’t partaking because he couldn’t see who was out there. The SP echoed that he had heard that argument from a current bishop (which may have spurred the discussion), then immediately poo-pooed the idea and rendered his decision that in this stake sacrament would be passed to the foyer and even a mother’s room or screaming child room as necessary. The point of this story is that I think the idea of a virtual sacrament probably hits that same snag with others of the mindset of “preventing” unworthily taking the sacrament.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

… One of the ultra conservatives brought up that when he was bishop he directed the sacrament not to be passed to the foyer because he couldn’t fulfill his duty as bishop in ensuring those who were unworthy weren’t partaking because he couldn’t see who was out there. …

Now I have the mental image of a bishop leaping over the pulpit and crawling over people in the pews to smack the sacrament out of someone’s hand seconds before they unworthily put it in their mouth.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

… One of the ultra conservatives brought up that when he was bishop he directed the sacrament not to be passed to the foyer because he couldn’t fulfill his duty as bishop in ensuring those who were unworthy weren’t partaking because he couldn’t see who was out there. …

Now I have the mental image of a bishop leaping over the pulpit and crawling over people in the pews to smack the sacrament out of someone’s hand seconds before they unworthily put it in their mouth.

😆 Right?!

(I could almost see this guy doing that. He’s also the one who in our discussion about the new civil/temple marriage rules was worried about the loss of control regarding marriage the bishops would have. Really? It’s up to him to decide who, where, or how somebody in his congregation marries? FWIW I didn’t let that one slide and made it very clear that marriage is between the couple and God and bishops have nothing to do with it unless asked.)

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

… One of the ultra conservatives brought up that when he was bishop he directed the sacrament not to be passed to the foyer because he couldn’t fulfill his duty as bishop in ensuring those who were unworthy weren’t partaking because he couldn’t see who was out there. …

Now I have the mental image of a bishop leaping over the pulpit and crawling over people in the pews to smack the sacrament out of someone’s hand seconds before they unworthily put it in their mouth.

Has anyone ever seen a Bishop prevent someone from taking the Sacrament during church? I’ve always wondered about that.

[Anonymous]

Minyan Man wrote:

nibbler wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

… One of the ultra conservatives brought up that when he was bishop he directed the sacrament not to be passed to the foyer because he couldn’t fulfill his duty as bishop in ensuring those who were unworthy weren’t partaking because he couldn’t see who was out there. …

Now I have the mental image of a bishop leaping over the pulpit and crawling over people in the pews to smack the sacrament out of someone’s hand seconds before they unworthily put it in their mouth.

Has anyone ever seen a Bishop prevent someone from taking the Sacrament during church? I’ve always wondered about that.

I have not. Many years ago while in a bishopric I was asked to specifically observe to see if an individual did or not, but only report, not interfere. He did not partake. I would think protocol would be for the bishop/SP to talk to the individual privately if they have asked them not to partake and they did.

[Anonymous]

It wouldn’t surprise me if they stopped me from taking it. I haven’t done anything save to call some on their lack of common decency.

Before all this virus incident, I returned to church, and it seemed like half the place warmly greeted me, something that I did not expect. Before, I did have a Bishop ask me some really indecent questions and I told him to stop or I was calling the Police. Some people have the idea that a single woman who is not roadkill ugly must be whoring about. The truth is that I am devoted to God and because of the fact that I have no “parts”, there is no desire. I am so thankful that I don’t face that like the rest of us do.

[Anonymous]

We had stake council last night (via phone). The SP said he didn’t expect any movement on the idea of doing virtual sacrament meetings and said he has been told that’s not on the table. He does expect that there may be a virtual Come Follow Me option forthcoming especially if this drags on longer than a few more weeks. He also said that early morning seminary has already moved to either the total online version or using video conferencing but that institute has been cancelled altogether. In our stake there is a senior couple who does institute, and they have been sent home.

Side note, missionaries in our mission are all quarantined to their apartments. They can keep in phone/virtual contact with those they are teaching and can do discussions using Facebook or other means but they can’t have direct contact with anyone or leave except to go to the store. Thinking back to my days as a missionary I’d have gone stir crazy and likely gotten into trouble.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

Minyan Man wrote:

nibbler wrote:

Now I have the mental image of a bishop leaping over the pulpit and crawling over people in the pews to smack the sacrament out of someone’s hand seconds before they unworthily put it in their mouth.

Has anyone ever seen a Bishop prevent someone from taking the Sacrament during church? I’ve always wondered about that.

I have not. Many years ago while in a bishopric I was asked to specifically observe to see if an individual did or not, but only report, not interfere. He did not partake. I would think protocol would be for the bishop/SP to talk to the individual privately if they have asked them not to partake and they did.

I personally find it very unfortunate that bishops and state presidents take their callings so personally. Yes, it’s important they observe their responsibilities, but they must not let this artificial power take over their human decency. Slapping the sacrament tray out of someone’s hand is out of line. Isn’t the sacrament representative of the atonement and sacrifice of Jesus Christ? Therefore, what say does any man have over Jesus concerning the worthiness of an individual?

[Anonymous]

My post was very tongue-in-cheek. I imagine bishops would keep the eagle eye out during the sacrament so they can confront the person afterwards.

That said, it’s still sad. If a person “unworthily” partakes, that’s between them and god, right? No need for some equally imperfect person to inject themselves into the equation.

[Anonymous]

grobert93 wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

Minyan Man wrote:

Has anyone ever seen a Bishop prevent someone from taking the Sacrament during church? I’ve always wondered about that.

I have not. Many years ago while in a bishopric I was asked to specifically observe to see if an individual did or not, but only report, not interfere. He did not partake. I would think protocol would be for the bishop/SP to talk to the individual privately if they have asked them not to partake and they did.

I personally find it very unfortunate that bishops and state presidents take their callings so personally. Yes, it’s important they observe their responsibilities, but they must not let this artificial power take over their human decency. Slapping the sacrament tray out of someone’s hand is out of line. Isn’t the sacrament representative of the atonement and sacrifice of Jesus Christ? Therefore, what say does any man have over Jesus concerning the worthiness of an individual?

I love Nibbler’s sense of humor because it mirrors mine so much. His remark was meant to tickle our funny bones. That said, I think that the majority of SPs and bishops take their role as “judges in Israel” very seriously – some to the Nth degree. My own current bishop and SP seem to be much more on the mild side in this regard, but I do know and have seen bishops who are quite the opposite. I wholeheartedly agree with you that the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is a very personal ordinance and I personally believe it has more power than average Mormon thinks it does. Many bishops and SPs seem to tend to be more on the strict obedience side where I am much more on the grace side. Some of my personal belief aligns with church theology and policy, some does not.

[Anonymous]

I too call BS on the idea of a bishop “seeing” people take the sacrament. That’s just a convenient rationale for trying to control people, a disease that many in power have. Absolutely ridiculous. How does he know that the man in the 3rd row didn’t beat his wife that week, or cheat on her or commit fraud? I can definitely tell the difference between “ultra conservative” and “insecure control freak” and so do most people, it’s just we sometimes let the bullies win ;-(

[Author]

Posts