Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'sacrament'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Third Hour Popular Forums
    • Third Hour Admin Alerts
    • LDS Gospel Discussion
    • General Discussion
    • Learn about The Church of Jesus Christ Of Latter-day Saints
    • Current Events
    • Advice Board
  • Gospel Boards
    • Jewish Beliefs Board
    • Christian Beliefs Board
    • Organizations
    • Study Boards
  • General Discussion Forums
    • Parenting
    • Interests
    • Just for Fun
  • Resources
    • Family
    • Missionary Work
    • Family History
    • Preparedness
    • Share
    • LDS Resources and Information
  • International Forums

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 12 results

  1. I have searched many times for an answer to this question but never found any official church statements on this. So I was excited when just this morning I came across an article on entitled “Little Children and The Sacrament.” (…but was disappointed to find the article was more of an editorial by a member rather than an official statement or clarification by a church leader. It didn’t even have any quotes from church leaders. And the rational used in the article seemed like quite a stretch. Here are some quotes from the article: • Jesus commanded His disciples to “give [the sacrament] unto the multitude.” That multitude included “little ones.” • When priesthood holders today pronounce the sacrament prayers, they ask Heavenly Father to bless and sanctify the bread and the water “to the souls of all those” who partake. All. Each person who partakes—including each little child. There simply isn’t enough detail in the story to know whether the sacrament was given to small children. And to imply that the “all” in the sacrament prayer includes small children….again, I don’t see how you can draw that conclusion. Given who strongly God condemns the baptizing of little children (Moroni 😎 and given that taking the sacrament is to help us repent and renew our baptismal covenants (neither of which applies to small children)…it would seem to me the best thing would be for little children not to partake of the sacrament, but rather emphasize to the adults our need for the sacrament so that we can repent and become pure and innocent again like little children. Thoughts? Has anyone ever found anything official from the church on this topic? Should or should we not give the sacrament to children before they are baptized?
  2. Can anyone provide doctrinal and direct documentation on whether children under the age of 8 (unbaptized children) should take the Sacrament? I understand that Mormon was appalled that the Church in his day was performing baptisms for infants and children under the age of 8, and his reason for this is because children who have not yet reached the age of accountability are already guaranteed salvation, and therefore to assume that they require baptism is an affront to the Power of the Atonement. Similarly, it is my opinion (I have not seen any direct doctrine to support it) that it is wrong for children who have not yet been baptized to "renew covenants" that they have not yet made (and do not need to make). Can anyone show me revealed doctrine on the subject? (Lesson manuals, including nursery lessons, does not constitute doctrine -- I'm looking for something directly from the Prophet or an Apostle of the Lord.) Many thanks!
  3. As many know, the Brethren have been trying to help the church membership place an increased importance on keeping the Sabbath holy. As part of that effort, our bishop has felt that our youth need to learn a greater appreciation for the Sacrament. Not just keeping it sacred and holy on Sunday, but keeping it with us throughout the week. We can preach and preach at them, but getting them to take something into their hearts is another thing. We've talked about some kind of interactive activity or experience to help them understand the Sacrament, but beyond that, we've pretty much come up short. In discussion as the YW board, we've tried to figure out what more we can do. I suggested working it in to every lesson we can, and of course showing by example and testimony what the Sacrament means to us. The problem is, I'm not even sure a lot of us have given it enough thought as adults. So my question to you is, what do you do to make the Sacrament more meaningful in your lives, and what suggestions do you have for helping the youth do the same?
  4. Our ward has a chronic sacrament meeting lack of reverence. Several problems as I see them: 1. They don't start on time. at least 2-5 minutes late. 2. They open the overflow well before the meeting starts even though the chapel isn't full, and no one is back there 3. No prelude music 4. Bishopric doesn't even get seated on the stand until 1 min before starting (5 min before starting because they start late) 5. Chapel doors are kept open the whole time? (Is this standard practice) 6. Foyer looks like a yard sale during sacrament. Usually 15-20 people out there with what appears to be almost every toy their children own. What is being done in general in the individual sacrament meetings to foster reverence during sacrament meeting and throughout the rest of church?
  5. I am giving my mission farewell talk in Sacrament Meeting the day after tomorrow and I need help writing my talk!! I know it seems pretty late to start writing it but I am usually pretty good at writing talks, I just have trouble thinking of what to talk about. My topic is on D&C 4 and how "love qualifies you for the work". I'm honestly not entirely sure what that means! I feel like it means that even if you're not the most qualified or educated person, that if you have a sincere love for the people you're teaching that it doesn't matter and the Spirit will take care of the rest. Does that seem accurate? Any tips on giving a good talk would be appreciated, really!! (scriptures, quotes, etc. are also appreciated) Thank you!
  6. My dear wife is currently in an inpatient rehab unit in a local hospital. As I was leaving on Saturday evening I was struck with a very strong impression to stop turn around and give her s blessing of comfort and strength. I dropped the cooler bag the leash for her service dog walked up to her laid my hands on her, shared with her some very sacred promises and words of blessing and encouragement from our father in heaven, we shared many tears of joy and love not many words after words. Once I returned home still filling inspired I called my Bishop to see If we could some how make arrangements to get the sacrament brought in for her. Well he approached me and suggested that my son and I go ahead and take it in for her today. After holding the priesthood for 30 plus years this was the 1st time I had the honor of administering the Lords sacrament in this type of setting and then for it to be with my son and for it be for my lovely spouse. I can not but marvel at how the need was seen and how I was allowed to serve my family by exercising my priesthood. Our Heavenly indeed knows us looks out for us and provides for our needs. I am thankful I was sensitive enough to listen to the spirit and was able to serve my family. The last thing Kathy said to me tonight "Thank you for bringing me the sacrament."
  7. For the last month I haven't been able to take the sacrament. I've done some confessing to the Bishop and have to wait to be able to take it again. Does this mean that I am unable to have the Spirit of the Lord with me until I can righteously partake of the sacrament again? Does the Holy Ghost leave and completely forsake someone while they can't take the sacrament? Am I unable to hear it's prompting's until I can take the sacrament again?
  8. Anybody know if there is a guideine about if we should be prohibited from taking the sacrament if struggling with the word of wisdom?
  9. Hey, every season my hockey team decides on a type of haircut for us all to get as part of team spirit and during playoffs we don't shave. Last year was flow (long hair), since a lot of the players are also lax bros, but this year we are doing mohawks. we aren't doing those weird punk mohawks, and it is kind of hard to describe how they look so i'll post some links from when i was looking on the internet to help you guys out. I want to know if it is inappropriate for me to be serving the sacrament (i'm 15) while having a mohawk. I understand i probably won't be asked to skip out until i get rid of it, but i still don't want anything that might lead to problems. Please let me know what you think, if it is inappropriate or not. Thanks!
  10. that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son Hi, My name is Jeremy and I am LDS. To day I will be talking about sacrament and children. Let me first say this: We declare before every other church that baptism of children before the age of accountability is an abomination before the lord. I am writing this because I feel the BAPTISM and SACRAMENT are equal. One is just as important as the other. And they should be done together in my opinion. I think we should use wisdom in making this decision. I feel the greatest wisdom is to do this in order. To me it looks odd that we tell other churches to WAIT for baptism and then go ahead with giving the child sacrament as if the child has not waited. It's pointless because children don't need sacrament or PRACTICE. How hard is it to eat bread and drink water? Here are some comments that I would like to address: 1. Sacrament prepares children for the real thing. If this is true then other churches that baptize CHILDREN are right, because baptizing children PREPARES them for the sacrament they will be taking right away. So that comment seems to make no sense to me. Baptism PREPARES us BEFORE sacrament prepares us. They are of EQUAL importance and should be treated as EQUAL. Thank you for your thoughts tough. (: 2. Church doctorine does not say children should NOT partake of sacrament. This is TRUE. The church also does not say any thing about the order that a child should become a priest. We institute the ORDER in WISDOM. We should also use WISDOM to know that children need to WAIT till they are accountable before taking a sacred sacrament. 3. Why then do we allow non members to partake of the sacrament? They are also not worthy. Two fold answer. First thanks to classylady for the first. General authority and not me, has made it clear that taking the sacrament is ok for the unbaptized because it is a representation of the sacrament they will take when they are older. That is his opinion and in other words he is saying that the church will not STOP any one from partaking of the sacrament. HOWEVER. The church will also not stop you from taking the sacrament if you are a less active and in transgression. It's up to YOU to decide if you are worthy. Or in this case if the child should take it. So Russell M. Nelson in the Ensign, March 1983 is simply saying, we won't stop you. This does not answer the question of where it's RIGHT it only answers the question of what people THINK. In most cases if you break the word of wisdom no one will do much either. We have to decide to do right. 4. Am I picking a fight? My purpose of this thread is to give comfort and assurance to those of you choosing not to let children under the age of 8 partake of sacrament. I try to back all my comments up with scripture and honesty. You can give me input and we can talk. That is what I am here to do. How you PROCESS this thread is YOUR business. You can make me any kind of MONSTER you want. But it's YOUR reality of the IDEA not mine. I don't let my children partake of sacrament, so don't feel bad. Here is why: Quote: Elder Dallin H. Oaks We are not grounded in the wisdom of the world or the philosophies of men-however traditional or respected they may be. Our testimony of Jesus Christ is based on the revelations of God to His prophets and to us individually. Ensign Jan 2011 What this is saying is that we do not run our church by a tradition system but by wisdom from revelation. So we don't baptize children because we know from the prophets of the Book of Mormon that children under the age 8 are not accountable. No where is there any doctrine that children under 8 should take sacrament. So to allow sacrament to an unbaptized child is a TRADITION or PHILOSOPHY Now some will say we prepare children to take sacrament by giving it to them. But this is not a PRACTICE run of blessing the sacrament. It's the REAL sacrament. This FORCES them to partake of the covenant of baptism and they do not require it. Ask a Mormon this next time he or she brings it up: Shouldn't we practice BAPTISM too? Why can't we simply practice sacrament at home with house bread? Why can't we simply explain the sacrament in primary? Why give the REAL sacrament to an unprepared child? What covenants are they renewing, since they don't have any yet? In truth, the only real answer is that Mormons giving the sacrament to children under 8 are committing a creed or philosophy, since no where in the doctrine of the church does it say children at 8 should not be baptized but SHOULD take the sacrament. Why do it in REVERSE??? It's backwards and confusing. If we are going to give sacrament to children we should be baptizing them since we feel they are ready to partake of the covenant of Jesus Christ! The TRUE Mormon would teach the child about Jesus as is the roll of the guardian of that child. Teach the child about what baptism is, teach the child about what sacrament is, and then tell the child that he or she must wait till 8 years and baptism and then that child may partake of the sacrament. But to do it BACKWARDS is truely foolish and makes our church look bad. Here we are telling all the other churches they don't need to baptize children and here we are giving our children the sacrament of Jesus Christ before they need it! If that's not the most backward hypocrisy I have ever heard. Sorry guys Here is why we need to stay away from doing things out of order and by our OWN intellect and opinion in GOD's church. Joseph Smith in History of the church 1:17 states: Creeds of the churches of that day "were an abomination in his sight" Now we declare to OTHER churches THEIR creeds are wrong and on the other hand here WE are committing CREEDS that are also an abomination before the lord. "For I am a God of order" In conclusion, children obviously should not take of the sacrament. In truth my children will appreciate it a LOT more and it will have a very special meaning for them because they are doing it in ORDER. First baptism THEN partaking of the sacrament. My children don't need to prepare to take the sacrament by indulging in the REAL sacrament at church an. They are educated right at home on what the sacrament is. My little boy has even practiced the sacrament in the kitchen with store bought bread. It was very sweet to see him bless it and pass it. And I felt wonderful knowing we were not offending the Lord. If Catholics can manage it then I think that the LDS church can manage it as well. So stand up for your belief to do it in ORDER and if you get questions just send them a link to this page! Hope this helps. -Jeremy What is the sacrament? Jesus Christ Instituted the Sacrament “Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to his Apostles, saying, ‘Take, eat’ (Matt. 26:26). ‘This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me’ (Luke 22:19). In a similar manner he took the cup of wine, traditionally diluted with water, said a blessing of thanks for it, and passed it to those gathered about him, saying: ‘This cup is the new testament in my blood,’ ‘which is shed … for the remission of sins.’ ‘This do in remembrance of me.’ … Renewing Covenants through the Sacrament - Liahona June 2010 Corinthians 11:27-31 – Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
  11. Howdy, An acquaintance and I were discussing the concept of Christian Communion; we were wondering why the ritual is not shared more broadly across denominations? For instance, would a Catholic partaking in a Protestant Communion received the same spiritual renewal, (symbolic covenant), as he would receive at his customary parish? I appreciate any responses. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Kawazu
  12. Hello all, In the interest in continuing discussion on here and getting peaceful, thoughtful, and loving advice from others who share my general eternal goals, I'd like to talk about a controversial subject. I hope I will not be judged too harshly for this, but I need some help with something that has been very challenging to me of late. Why do I believe that am I a guy? How have I been able to come to terms with the fact that I am male? What has given me added strength in living a male life, a life I feel I was supposed to have lived? The answer is simple. XY. Because I am XY, I believe I was intended for all intents and purposes to be male. Regardless of what happened in utero or how my brain came to be the way it is or how my gender identity was affected, I am not female, and I base this on the fact that I am XY. Being an intended male, I make a further jump that I am also an intended spiritual male. In other words, Heavenly Father intended for me to come to this earth to live a male life because I have a male spirit regardless of Telestial world defects that might arise. As a member of the church, it is my role and duty to receive the Priesthood, and take a female to marriage in the temple to provide tabernacles for future Spirit children. This works out well for me, very well in fact. I began to feel some hope - some feeling of purpose to my situation. My job here, my challenge, was to learn to live a male life, and find joy therein because it is what God intended for me to have. This is based completely and totally on the fact that I have XY chromosomes. Ok, now for AIS. Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome is an intersexed disorder that affects exclusively male fetuses. What happens is the XY male's genetics are altered in such a way that their cells do not develop androgen receptors. What does this mean? It means even in the presence of testosterone, the body will not react to it. What does this effect? Well dang near everything. These male children do not feel the effects of the testosterone their own fetal testes are producing. As such, their testes remain inside their bodies, their penis never properly develops and in fact remains inverted (though it is not a uterus). Their brains do not change as they should in the presence of testosterone, etc. At some point later in life their internal testes will begin to pump extreme amounts of testosterone (as does with most males) however that testosterone will have no effect - they will gain no male secondary sex characteristics. These children do not make it to puberty though, at least not as males. See the undeveloped male sex organ looks like a vagina to the untrained eye. These children are often misidentified at birth as females and raised as such. Often these individuals have NO idea they are actually males until puberty when they do not get a period, or worse, when they are trying to get pregnant. Despite the absence of ovaries, the male body still produces estrogen, just in lesser amounts, but without functional testosterone the counteract the effect, these boys develop female secondary sex characteristics as if you took a normal male child, put him on androgen blockers and pumped him full of estrogen before puberty. Thus, if you look at an AIS male, they appear just like females. The worst part is, that even if these AIS males, once revealed, wanted to try to be a male, it would be nearly impossible, as the only hormones that will work to masculinize their bodies will not work because of the same deformity that made them they way they are currently. So what is my point? Why does AIS break my brain? Well the problem is, I, and most of the world, sees AIS males as females. Why? It is too convenient not to. They look female, they sound female, they are raised female, they have a vaginal opening, with no visible male genitalia. No one is going to question by looking at them or by sexual intercourse if they are female. It can only be questioned by looking at their chromosomes which stand out because they are XY. However this person, despite ALL appearances to the contrary, is, and was intended to be from birth, a male. However, due to the current society situation we are in, due to limited medical technology to treat such a condition or provide for early diagnosis, they are considered females. So for me to be consistent in my reasoning that I am a male both physically and spiritually and was always intended to be so (which as I mentioned was based on the fact that I have XY chromosomes) I must also equally apply that fact to individuals with AIS. The difference is, the church sees them as female generally - even spiritually (though there has been no direct addressing of AIS, I'm sure it is handled on an individual basis) but the problem remains that many of these women don't even know they are actually men with an intersexed disorder. So my brain is breaking. It means that essentially some of Heavenly Father's male children are not able to receive the Priesthood, be fathers, and worse they are marrying other males in the temple! You might tell me, oh all that will be worked out in the Millenium, and perhaps it will be. Someone once told me that it might be possible that God placed a female spirit inside a male body. They said this to help justify why they might have a female gender identity. I told that person it was a ludicrous statement, that such would just be a source of confusion, and while I do believe confusion exists in this world, I don't believe God to be the author of it. As such I told them it was much more probable that God would never ever ever place the spirit of a female into the body of a male (or vice versa). But the implications of AIS break this mold. There ARE male spirits being born into (for all intents and purposes) female bodies. Of course ALL of this is based upon my original premise that we are spiritually what we are chromosomally. This is Occam's Razor for me - it is the simplest explanation for me. However, if this premise is not true, who is to say that God doesn't place female spirits into male bodies and that I myself, might have been intended by God to be female? Or perhaps AIS is fundamentally different than Transsexualism in that God makes exceptions for those who look completely one sex and not another - such is the case with AIS, and these people were actually always intended to be female, while I, complete with GID, was always intended to be male. It just... breaks.... everything. I mean, I'm not losing my testimony over it, but a powerful pillar of strength has been toppled, and I need to find a way to prop it back up. I guess I am looking for a one size fits all answer because somewhere inside, I feel there SHOULD be one - I mean God IS a God of order - there has to be some sense made of this all. We can't all be wandering around wondering what spiritual sex we are, or worse determining it for ourselves, because too much Gospel-stuff hinges on it. If it is as truly arbitrary as some would lead me to believe, then why the heck does it matter so much to the church what sex you are? Of course, if I continue down this rabbit hole it will open up a whole lot of dissatisfactions I have with sex-role differences in the church, and that is certainly not where I want this discussion to go. I truly look forward to your insights. I feel I have no one else I can ask these questions to. I dare not speak to non-member TS's about them, they will only try to poke holes in the whole argument and try to get me to leave my faith. As such, I'm desperately desiring to hear from you all. Thank you! * I might have some details misunderstood regarding AIS, but the more important facts, those related to their chromosomes, is correct.