3-hour meeting block: Too long or not long enough?

[Vort]

I have heard a surprising (to me) number of Latter-day Saints over the past decade express the idea that a three-hour meeting block is "too long". As a husband, father, and brother in the gospel who has raised and is raising five children from childhood to adulthood in the Church, I find three hours to be, if anything, far too short a time to spend among my fellow Saints. I gain strength from interacting with them and appreciate the opportunity to serve. To me, Church time seems like a small sample of living in Zion.

When I was deacon-aged and younger, we actually spent more time in Church than today, certainly on a weekly basis. We had Sunday School and Priesthood meeting in the morning, then went home and came back for sacrament meeting in the afternoon. We also had MIA during the week, my mother had Relief Society on Tuesday, and in general it just seemed like we were more involved in Church activities.

I know that the Brethren, led by Elder Packer, worked very hard in the '80s and '90s to do away with much of this meeting overscheduling, and I think the Church is better off for it, so don't think I'm complaining. I am not. But the three-hour meeting block, which was being used by those of us meeting in remote areas where we had to drive 45 minutes or more to get to Church long before it became general policy, seems to be a great blessing.

Anyone else think the current meeting format is a great thing and wonder at the negativity that comes from some quarters? Or do I stand alone (again)?

[pam]

No you don't stand alone. I have also heard it from many members and wonder why they think it's too long? Are there more important things to be doing?

[beefche]

I joined the church after the consolidation of the meetings, so I never knew what it was like to meet in the morning and evening on Sunday, and a couple of times through the week.

I'm fine with the 3 hr block. It seems long after I've stayed up way too late and struggle to stay awake, but that's my fault.

[Dravin]

One aspect for making it feel longer may be the lack of breaks. Previously one may have spent more time in church but less time at once. How many church members making these comments with past experience with the previous meeting schedule though? If a 25 year old complains it's not by comparison.

[estradling75]

I could see if you had a pre-nursey age toddlers... Trying to keep them reverent and respectful for three hours is hard work

[Vort]

One aspect for making it feel longer may be the lack of breaks. Previously one may have spent more time in church but less time at once. How many church members making these comments with past experience with the previous meeting schedule though? If a 25 year old complains it's not by comparison.

My high priests group leader always brings candy or other treats for the group members on non-Fast Sundays. Not sure how much it keeps down the complaining, but even those of us who already looked forward to Priesthood meeting have yet another reason for anticipation.

But the Relief Society has their centerpiece, so I guess that puts us in our place. (You know, the place with all the Tootsie Rolls.)

[RMGuy]

For many in leadership the reality is that the 3 hour block can quickly become the 4, 5 or 6 hour day...or more.

I think one of the reasons that we hear from some that the 3 hour block is too long is that for many the 6 day work week is not uncommon and that means that Sunday may well be the ONLY family day. If that is true it can mean less time to spend with spouse or children.

-RM

[Vort]

I could see if you had a pre-nursey age toddlers... Trying to keep them reverent and respectful for three hours is hard work

As a father of five, my observation is you don't make any attempt to keep a pre-nursery age toddler reverent or respectful. You try to keep them entertained and quiet. Sleeping is good.

It's true that you get a lot of hall time during those years, but they don't last forever.

[pam]

My high priests group leader always brings candy or other treats for the group members on non-Fast Sundays. Not sure how much it keeps down the complaining, but even those of us who already looked forward to Priesthood meeting have yet another reason for anticipation.

But the Relief Society has their centerpiece, so I guess that puts us in our place. (You know, the place with all the Tootsie Rolls.)

I think I need to go to your Priesthood meetings. Tootsie rolls are my favorite.

[Just_A_Guy]

I think society generally has transitioned from viewing "worship" as an inherently communal/social activity, to little more than a show that should offer constant entertainment with little-to-no effort on our own part. Once we become unwilling to put forth the effort to make Church a spiritually fulfilling experience, one hour--let alone three--becomes excessive unless there is far better sermonizing/teaching than what prevails in the average LDS ward.

In other words: Television has ruined kids these days.

[Tyler90AZ]

In comparison to the rest of the Christian world, three hours is long. Considering the fact they are only used to an hour. I think most converts and non-members are shocked when they hear we attend for three hours. The fact that we attend church three hours and the program as a whole, really attest to the fact this this is a lifestyle. Many people aren't used to their religion being a lifestyle, more of a Sunday only thing.

When I first heard three hours I didn't think I would be able to bear it, none to three is a jump. Now I only feel the spirit strongly when I attend for three hours, I feel high. Although sometimes I dread initially going, after Sacrament I desire to stay for the remaining classes.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Tyler90AZ

[Backroads]

I recall talking with Christian friends who are shocked when they hear we sit at church for three hours straight. Then again, many of them go to church more than one day a week... I imagine it all comes out evenly.

I don't think I've ever seriously thought the three-hour block was too long. I used to wonder about the purpose of the non-sacrament meetings, but adulthood has made me more appreciative of them.

The only criticism I would venture to give is the longer-than-three-hours for those in leadership positions. Meetings to prepare for meetings to prepare for meetings is ridiculous. My husband is currently ward mission leader. His personality is to be quick, direct, get it done... and he thinks all the extra meetings that seem to exist for only their own sakes ruin the work.

[sixpacktr]

I too remember spending all day at church. My father was my Bishop when I was a teen and he would spend from 6ish in the morning until 8 or so at night at church on Sundays. I remember being at PH by 8, then SS, then going home (usually we spent time at a friends home, or they at ours, then back to church for a 1.5 hour Sacrament meeting. I also remember going to Primary on Thursday nights for several hours, and MIA was at least 2 hours (not that I remember much, I played basketball more than I did anything else!).

The 3 hour block was implemented to reduce the burden of time upon church members so that they'd spend more time with their families teaching the gospel. It wasn't meant as a 'break' per se, but rather put the burden back more on the parents to raise up righteous children. But how many of us really do (did) that? I would bet that most filled their time with worldly pursuits rather than spiritual, family oriented ones.

I like the 3 hour block, and when I was serving in some leadership positions regularly spent 8 hours or so on Sunday in meetings, etc. And those days NEVER felt like the 8 hours of drudgery that work felt like. I was on the Lord's time, not mine. But if they announced on Saturday or Sunday that the Saints haven't used the reduced time as they had hoped and that we're going back to the old blocks of meetings, that too would be fine with me.

[classylady]

Under the old system wasn't Sacrament Meeting 2 hours? Or was it 1 1/2 hours? So, Sacrament Meeting now is definitely shorter. Which means it's easier on the babies/toddlers. I was in my mid 20's when the meeting schedule switched over.

I happen to love the Block schedule. I remember the old schedule with Priesthood early on Sunday morning, then Sunday School. And then later in the evening--Sacrament Meeting. For those of us who had a long commute to church, it was difficult to be going back and forth, plus the week day meetings for RS and Primary. We had about a 10 to 15 mile drive from our house to our Chapel. It must have been hard on my parents, being farmers without a large income, to be driving back and forth--with only one car. But, they did it, faithfully.

It can be hard to sit through 3 hours of meetings, especially if one has health problems. But, we do have two, 5 to 10 minute breaks between the different meetings, which helps. And it isn't like the kids have to sit through 3 hours straight of Sacrament Meeting. They have Primary, which is divided between class time and Sharing Time.

For the most part, I personally think the three hour block meetings go by pretty quickly. I admit though, that when I was in my last trimester of my pregnancies, the meetings seemed to last a lot longer than three hours!

[Vort]

I think I need to go to your Priesthood meetings. Tootsie rolls are my favorite.

Come along! But be sure to

.

[MarginOfError]

When I first moved into my current ward, three hours seemed like eternity. It's gotten better over the years. I attribute most of the change to improvement in the ward's Sunday School organization. We now have 3 really good teachers that rotate teaching responsibility. The rotation means different teaching styles. Some of the teaching styles don't appeal to everyone, but at least this way, you only have to wait a week to get to a teacher that does appeal to you. Previously, if the teacher's style didn't appeal to you, it was discouraging to face week after week of sunday school lessons that you had to fight to get anything out of. (yup, it's a bit of an attitude problem, but it's helps when you can make learning easier).

I think the quality of teaching has marginally improved in my elders quorum meetings, but not by much. Some weeks are entirely insufferable. Part of that is the quality of the teachers, and part of that is the fact that we've not had a strong elders quorum leader since I've been here. But I do see glimmers of improvement.

One thing my ward is doing now that I expect will be a boon for improvement is the Improving Gospel Teaching course. If we continue to teach people how to be better teachers and leaders, I suspect the meetings will become more enjoyable. Especially if we can get elders quorum teachers to learn how to facilitate discussion instead of talking for 20 minutes.

For me, there isn't much social fulfillment at the three hour block. I often feel like people are there and intend to get out of the building as fast as possible. Part of that is the demographic (out of 160 active members, 90 are younger than 12; 45 are younger than 3). But there's also an attitude that the church building is just too far away to travel to any day other than Sunday. I think that attitude is a bit disruptive.

I also don't think that we do enough outside of the block, socially. Friendships and testimonies will be forged and tempered by relationships built outside of the block. Members need to meet socially outside of church and get to know each other. For me, that just doesn't happen. However, the EQ recently started volleyball nights, so maybe it will start to improve.

[mikbone]

Church Unveils "Slow-Track" Program

SALT LAKE CITY

In order to better meet the needs of "our most average members," church representative Howard S. Jeppeson announced the creation of a new slow-track membership program. "This program caters to those members of the church who may not be top-level celestial material but who are still willing to put in a nominal effort toward their own salvation," he said.

The slow-track program includes the same components of normal church membership, but at a more relaxed pace. Members who sign on for the program are required to read scriptures and have personal and family prayer once a week, attend church once a month, visit teach or home teach four times a year, and watch one session of general conference every other year. If slow-track members can commit to these requirements for five years, they can earn a temple recommend stamped with an S for "slow track," after which they are expected to attend the temple semiannually. According to Jeppeson, the church may create a shorter, condensed version of the temple ceremony for S-track members "in order to better accommodate those members' shorter attention spans and lower levels of ambition."

Social historian Jane Schippen, PhD, a long-time scholarly observer of Mormon society, hails the new slow-track program. "Mormonism pays a great deal of attention to its high achievers, like those who are stake president before they turn forty or women who have eight children and maintain a spotless house," she observed. Similarly, she continued, "Mormons spend a lot of time and energy worrying about those on the other end of the spectrum, the less-actives." She sees the slow-track program as "a way to acknowledge and honor the vast majority of Mormons, those who will never hold high positions of leadership but who are nevertheless active - the sloggers, if you will."

Logan Stake president Gary L. Hackett agrees with Schippen and says that the new slow-track program "will prod the lazy ones into progressing at least a little bit, which is an improvement." He estimates that implementing the slow track will cut administrative tasks, such as nagging phone calls to complete home or visiting teaching, by as much as 75 percent. "It's about time we recognized that not everyone in the church is that top ten percent of the celestial kingdom material," he notes. "And, really, that's okay. I mean the bottom two levels of the celestial kingdom are supposed to be pretty good too, right?"

Most members seem happy with the soon-to-be-implemented system. "Let's face it," says local member Larry K. Whiting. "I'm not cut out for this high-paced, pressure-oriented Mormon lifestyle. I mean, home teaching four families every month? The scheduling alone takes way too much time. And then I have to go over there and pretend I care about these people when I'd rather be home watching ESPN? Give me the slow-track program any day." Local member Kendra Koenig agrees. "Do you know how much fun it is trying to roust five kids out of bed for family scripture study and prayer at 6:30 AM? I am sick to death of nagging them about it, and you can believe it's not doing our family harmony any good." She praised the slow-track system for offering a more realistic temple-attendance schedule. "Like anyone who has a life can manage to get out there twice a month? This slow-track program is the answer to my infrequent prayers."

[Dravin]

The only criticism I would venture to give is the longer-than-three-hours for those in leadership positions. Meetings to prepare for meetings to prepare for meetings is ridiculous. My husband is currently ward mission leader. His personality is to be quick, direct, get it done... and he thinks all the extra meetings that seem to exist for only their own sakes ruin the work.

It's kinda a two sided issue. First, I think sometimes there is a tendency to gather together in meetings when discussion outside of meetings could be used. It does make sense to go with a meeting in some circumstances though, if some leadership needs to touch base with half a dozen people it could possibly be quicker for the leadership to do it in a meeting instead of contacting each person individually. Particularly if the input from person D may influence what you discuss with person A so you don't have a situation where you have to call people back and change assignments.

Second, sometimes meetings get a little chatty. I've been in PECs where 30 minutes was taken chatting about Saturday fishing trips and other non-business related topics. I'm grateful my current Bishopric are proponents of direct and to the point meetings.

[MarginOfError]

The only criticism I would venture to give is the longer-than-three-hours for those in leadership positions. Meetings to prepare for meetings to prepare for meetings is ridiculous. My husband is currently ward mission leader. His personality is to be quick, direct, get it done... and he thinks all the extra meetings that seem to exist for only their own sakes ruin the work.

To add to Dravin's comment, I think it depends on what meetings the meetings are preparing for. If you meet as a ward council to prepare for an upcoming ward council, I'd agree--that's ridiculous.

It would also be ridiculous for a bishopric to spend any more than 2 minutes of their meeting preparing for PEC, etc. Agendas should be prepared well in advance and discussion topics should be clear before the meeting starts.

However, if your concern is that your husband has to have a ward mission correlation meeting before ward council meeting, I'm not going to have any sympathy. We used to have a ward mission leader who would use ward council in place of his ward mission correlation meeting. He'd have the elders come to ward council, and they would update us on every single discussion they'd had that week. Over 50% of our meetings were taken up by the missionaries, and it was awful. The new mission leader would get updates from the missionaries before ward council, and then he would do all the talking after deciding what was most relevant to ward council meeting. It was a huge improvement to the quality of the ward council meetings.

[Backroads]

Husband is fine with ward missionary meetings, but our ward consists of college students and the senial. He feels there is a lot of waste time... including meetings preparing for the same meeting.

[carlimac]

With babies and toddlers pre-nursery age- YES 3 hours is just too long! And try teaching a Primary class of 5 yr olds from 3-4 PM on Sunday afternoon. It's a battle. Those kids are just pooped and ready to be doing anything but listening to a lesson.

[Praetorian_Brow]

For the people who feel it is too long, there is an easy solution. Leave early or arrive late. For most people, the habitual routine brings far greater comfort than a spiritual awareness. Besides, the purpose of church attendance is for partaking of the Sacrament which means that 99% of the day is a social cocoon.

[daboosh]

In no way do I feel it's too long. I would actually like to have it longer.

You only get out what you put in.

[RipplecutBuddha]

Perhaps the feeling that it's so long on Sunday has something to do with the previously mentioned fact that most other Christian religions spend at most an hour and a half at church.

For my part, on the one hand, I agree that Sacrament is the priority, and ought to be the focus of our attendance. On the other hand, I also know that there's a very good reason other activities are scheduled for the meeting block. We need more than just the sacrament to keep our faith and testimonies strong, especially in the world as it is today. If we don't feel we can feel spiritual for the entire three hours, maybe going home and studying the scheduled lessons is a better idea. As with much of the policies of the church today, a case-by-case evaluation works best imho.

The thing I like to keep in mind, though, is that Sunday is not about us or our wants. We get six days of that as it is. The Lord is asking for our attention only one day a week, and considering what attention he paid to our needs, I don't really think I have any reason to gripe about a three-hour reminder of the fact.

[james12]

At one time in my stake there were only two church building for eight wards. I believe with permission (although I don't know whose) they began to do a 2 1/2 hour block. Sacrament was the same length, with Sunday school and priesthood shortened. I remember my wife telling me that the Relief Society sometimes had a five minute lesson after the prayer, announcements, music practice, etc. It definitely felt like a rush.

With continued people moving into the area the stake then split. We continued on the 2 1/2 hour block. At some point, the Stake President received a letter from church headquarters stating that the 2 1/2 hour block was not approved and should stop immediately. I found the entire situation rather amusing. Then in a World Wide Leadership Training President Monson mentioned shortened Sunday meeting schedules by saying, "Over the years, we’ve had to correct many attempts by well-meaning leaders to change some of the programs of the Church. We’ve dealt with lighted candles on sacrament tables, with locally determined changes in the length of Church meetings, with elimination of Sunday School from the Sunday block meetings." ("Opening Remarks", 2010 Worldwide Leadership Training Meeting). All of those in the audience laughed when we heard this statement.