Sacrament talks and 'quality control'

[MarginOfError]

lol all this actually reminds me of something that happened in a testimony mtg in our branch. my son (was 8 at the time) was sharing his testimony about christ and he was sharing what he had learned about christ's life. (i don't want to hear the comments about kids and testimonies, it's not a canned thing and the whining won't change anything)

I don't think anyone objects to children who can get up and share their thoughts on their own. It's the children who rely on the parent to feed them what to say that shouldn't be getting up. But if they can speak for themselves, they're welcome to share their testimony.

[Traveler]

One other point. We all seem to think that doctrinal errors need to be corrected – but how do we respond to those that correct our doctrinal mistakes? I find it most interesting that those with stories to share about false doctrines being taught and corrected that there is not one story about how happy someone was that they were corrected. Has no one ever been corrected?

All the stories are about how happy we are when someone else was corrected. This one fact should be strongly considered when we think of how we encourage others to treat those that we find disagreement with concerning doctrine. A basic understanding of us all is to treat others as we would be treated. Now, if I could be better at this myself I would just say – do as I do – follow my example. But strangely enough I have found that someone that gets away with the same things I do, that it ticks me off the more.

The Traveler

[Gwen]

i've been corrected and i'm glad to get corrected. i don't want to wander around being wrong. the key is if you are corrected in love or smugness on how the person feels. i've corrected ppl that thanked me for the clarification of the point. sometimes (most of the time i've found) the person understands it right it just didn't come out how they wanted it to. i have corrected ppl that didn't even know they are being corrected. i'm sure i've been corrected and didn't realize it.

we should never approach someone in a way contrary to how we would like to be approached. and not every point needs correcting. you correct everything and you come off like a smug know it all (or think you know it all) and it's counter productive. but major doctrinal points need to be clear.

[rayhale]

I’ve never seen a Bishop get up during a talk, or a testimony, the closest that I’ve seen, was a girl said something not nice about her brothers, getting close to cursing, she noticed the Bishopric looking at her in a disapproving way, so she corrected herself. The other time I’ve seen it was also during testimony meeting, several people, during their testimony said something depressing, either they were depressed, had a depressing week, or something else depressing, either the Bishop or the Stake President, I can’t remember which, got up, and talked about the Atonement, and tried to uplift what was getting a depressing Sacrament meeting.

[shdwlkr]

Well I have been in the church for a short period (40 years) and I have never seen anyone told to sit down during sacrament meeting, have heard the bishop or stake president correct some hazy doctrine.

Fast and Testimony meetings run the whole range of things from just another meeting to very interesting. Never have ever seen someone told they could not bear their testimony. Had some bear their testimony and the whole ward was in tears thought because sometimes things come out that no one knew about. Makes one wonder what the home teachers were doing though.

[Carl62]

Golly, that must have been one really bad testimony! I would think cutting someone off in a testimony meeting would be even rarer than seeing it done in a normal sacrament talk, given the deeply personal nature of the thing. Was it just that the bishop had a really quick hook, or was something really, really out of bounds said?

It really doesn't have to be anything said out of bounds to have a testimony cut off. Just two F and T meetings ago, a woman got up and gave a record-breaking 28 minute testimony that the bishop had to finally give the lady a note for her to wrap it up. Only three other people got to speak after her. It was monotonous!

[Carl62]

I am fine with the people sharing their testimony not being "professional" speakers, so long as they have a point. So many people do what I call "spiderwebbing" when they give their testimony/talks. They quickly jump from topic to topic until it reaches a point where I no longer remember what they were first talking about.

There's a number of people in our ward who do the same thing and it can get ridiculous. It's like listening to Edith Bunker give a testimony.

[JohnnyRudick]

. . .Sometimes 'damage control' may be necessary afterword. LM

You must be referring to a few of my talks

delivered back in the late 60's and early 70's:p

[Guest]

From Dallin H. Oaks:

A testimony of the gospel is a personal witness borne to our souls by the Holy Ghost that certain facts of eternal significance are true and that we know them to be true. Such facts include the nature of the Godhead and our relationship to its three members, the effectiveness of the Atonement, and the reality of the Restoration. UAdd a Note

A testimony of the gospel is not a travelogue, a health log, or an expression of love for family members. It is not a sermon. President Kimball taught that the moment we begin preaching to others, our testimony is ended.

I love that talk.

It is common in the wards I've been in to hear somebody recount all the things that happened that month like a diary during Testimony meetings that sometimes I feel like it's another episode of Young and the Restless instead of a Testimony.

I love Testimony meetings. I sometimes look back after bearing my testimony and wonder if that qualified for "preaching". When it's extemporaneous speaking like that, it is sometimes difficult to be sure I choose my words correctly especially when I start to say, "when we do this... " instead of "when I do this...".

Another thing I learned from my class in public speaking (English is my 3rd language, so I had extensive training in it) is that when you start a talk/oration/speech, it is good to recount a personal experience to introduce the message. It makes the talk more personal instead of sounding like a lecture and it can sometimes be helpful in "breaking the ice". But, saying something personal that has no relation to the topic is just a distraction and brings the focus to the speaker instead of the speech. For example, it is very common to start a sacrament talk with an anecdote about how the Counsellor or the Executive Secretary handed the topic and how they got very nervous or tried to avoid it, or how they took all week to prepare, etc. etc. All this is not related to the topic at hand and simply brings focus away from the speech and onto the speaker that it takes a little bit of "getting into the Spirit" to actually listen to the actual message.

Anyway, just my 2 cents on it.