Church, meetings, time requirements, what does HF think?

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Spaz

My brother's ward was running 2.5-hour blocks (here in Utah). A visiting GA noticed the shortened block, and the Stake Pres shortly thereafter received a letter explaining that it's not his prerogative to change the official church blocks. The next week, he was back at 3-hour blocks.


I was in a ward that moved to 2.5-hour blocks too. It changed about 4 months before we bought our house. Going back to the full 3 hours was so hard - it felt like I was in hell by the time priesthood ended.

That's pretty gutsy (and cool) for a stake prez to implement a shorter block without Salt Lake's permission, if true.

[Indy Coug]

Our ward in Saudi Arabia got so small we moved to 2.5 hour blocks to cut down to just one sacrament meeting talk a week.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by Spaz

I don't know. I only go to Church, and a quarterly meeting for activities committee (which I sometimes delegate to my wife).

I think, for the most part, meetings are a general waste of time. Still, an in-person meeting or telephone call will always be more effective than email or any other electronic means of communication.

You can still have an opinion on the matter, regardless of your current situation.

I'm not arguing that all in-person meetings should be replaced by emails. I am arguing that some in-person meetings are held much more frequently than is necessary, and the list of people supposed to attend is greater than it needs to be also.

For example, I was in an EQP with a Pres that insisted on holding presidency meetings EVERY Sunday. To me this is overkill. There were weeks when there was virtually nothing on the agenda to speak about, and certainly nothing that merited holding an in-person meeting.

[MikeWaters]

You are lucky if you are in a ward where everyone has a computer and email.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

I wonder if HF looks at what the Church has evolved into over the years, and thinks that the time
commitment (away from our families) asked of many members is much more than He ever intended it to be.
Has "man" received the gospel of JC, and the Church through which it is administered, and distorted it to the point
that it is in a sense defeating some of the core purposes of the gospel? Some of those core purposes being one's own spritual, and physical development, the creation of family units on the earth, and our responsibility to nurture them, and meet their needs?

Take for example Joe Mormon, who is an Elder. He has 4 or 5 families assigned to home teach. He has a calling involved with YM, or ward missionary, something like this. Even just for completing his HT every month, and fulfiling his calling, OUTSIDE of the 3 meetings on Sunday, he is going to spend 2 or 3 days a week going to other meetings, or HT.
On top of this, if the wife has a calling involved with anything during the week, there is at least one other night a week that she will be gone from the home. It could easily be the case where most weeks that either the husband or wife is not in the home any night, except for Fridays and Saturdays. I'm not sure this is the time requirement HF intended the church to put upon parents of young children.

One step to allow people to spend more time at home, is people need to quit having so many meetings, and have more conference calls, and utilize email more often. There are some meetings which are just not necessary to hold as often as some people think they should, such as EQP meetings, and missionary correlation.

Totally, completely, and unabashedly agree. One of my major annoyances in life is meeting for the point of meeting, and LDS people have this down to a science. My wife has been meeting weekly (and sometimes twice a week) to plan a pioneer trek this summer (another annoyance of mine...if the pioneers knew we were doing these, I think they'd laugh. 1) They didn't CHOOSE any of these trials, and 2) the fact that we think we're even approximating their suffering is laughable. What's next--Gethsemane Trek? But I digress...)

One redeeming point--I have heard several messages discouraging unnecessary meetings from the Brethren. Just not sure anyone's hearing it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

My wife has been meeting weekly (and sometimes twice a week) to plan a pioneer trek this summer (another annoyance of mine...if the pioneers knew we were doing these, I think they'd laugh. 1) They didn't CHOOSE any of these trials, and 2) the fact that we think we're even approximating their suffering is laughable. What's next--Gethsemane Trek? But I digress...)

This would be a great topic for another thread. I have quite a few thoughts on the whole pioneer trek phenomenon.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Totally, completely, and unabashedly agree. One of my major annoyances in life is meeting for the point of meeting, and LDS people have this down to a science. My wife has been meeting weekly (and sometimes twice a week) to plan a pioneer trek this summer (another annoyance of mine...if the pioneers knew we were doing these, I think they'd laugh. 1) They didn't CHOOSE any of these trials, and 2) the fact that we think we're even approximating their suffering is laughable. What's next--Gethsemane Trek? But I digress...)

One redeeming point--I have heard several messages discouraging unnecessary meetings from the Brethren. Just not sure anyone's hearing it.

Everyone is not hearing it, including local leaders like SP's and bishops.

The Brethren have also said to avoid meetings on Sundays, and that is ignored by some also.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You are lucky if you are in a ward where everyone has a computer and email.

Right, so why not take advantage, and utilize them more?

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Everyone is not hearing it, including local leaders like SP's and bishops.

The Brethren have also said to avoid meetings on Sundays, and that is ignored by some also.

I'm all for having the meetings on Sunday, if you're going to have them. Would rather get it over with while I'm in church clothes.

But...better option--no meeting at all.

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

I'm all for having the meetings on Sunday, if you're going to have them. Would rather get it over with while I'm in church clothes.

But...better option--no meeting at all.

Yes, no meeting at all is better option. Like I said, there are so many unnecessary meetings being held, it is ridiculous.

I hate meetings on Sundays. I like to spend my Sundays at home with the family. Unless it's a quick meeting (30 min. MAX) that can be held immediately prior to, or after the 3 hour block. But I freaking HATE going back to church for a meeting at 3pm, when Church is over at Noon.

BTW, just because the meeting is on a Sunday, who says you have to wear your full church garb? I don't.
Do you hang around in your church clothes all day waiting for a meeting that takes place 3 hours after church ends?