Predictions on policy changes during conference?

[The Folk Prophet]

9 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Small children go 4 hours before needing naps.  Having small children getting their nap interrupted on Sundays simply means you're scheduling Church around your child instead of scheduling your child around Church.

Are you suggesting we should put our child down for a nap at either 9 am or 3 pm instead of noon(ish) every day just to accommodate that church goes over the noon hour?

[anatess2]

24 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Are you suggesting we should put our child down for a nap at either 9 am or 3 pm instead of noon(ish) every day just to accommodate that church goes over the noon hour?

Church is not everyday.  But on Church day, however it works out for your Sabbath worship.  Also, Saturday is preparation for Sunday so the Sunday schedule may need Saturday adjustments as well.

This would be the same if you work odd hours - like my sister who is a nurse working different shifts every week whose husband is a music director - works after normal business hours.  Or any other environmental conditions in your lifestyle.

This is one of the things I learned from our clan tradition.  A child develops best when the child revolves with the family (of course with the developmental necessities of the child worked into the developmental necessities of every other member of that family including grandparents - as our family is traditionally 3-generations in one household) instead of the family revolving around the child.

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by anatess2

[SpiritDragon]

6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Church is not everyday.  But on Church day, yes.

This would be the same if you work odd hours - like my sister who is a nurse working different shifts every week whose husband is a music director - works after normal business hours.  Or any other environmental conditions in your lifestyle.

This is one of the things I learned from our clan tradition.  A child develops best when the child revolves with the family (of course with the developmental necessities of the child worked into the developmental necessities of every other member of that family including grandparents - as our family is traditionally 3-generations in one household) instead of the family revolving around the child.

For some kids this may work and for others it may not. With my first daughter, she needed morning naps (usually around 10 am) but has never been able to sleep while people are around. We had 9 am church and spent a lot of time walking the halls trying to keep her calm. She started to adapt to staying up until 12:30 -1:00 pm when we'd get home so she could nap and the time changed to 11-2, once again her nap was disrupted and 11 am is too early to have a nap before (she seemed to do best with 2-3 hour naps). When we again changed to the 1-4 time her usual nap time had shifted to being around 2:30 pm. Sundays and church always interrupted the nap schedule her body naturally preferred. We still went to church, and still tried to let her have naps at other times, it just made for a miserable day once a week. Our second child will just cuddle up and go to sleep for the most part and hasn't been bothered one way or the other by the timing of church. I've heard of plenty of other parents with similar experiences. It's not as much about revolving around the child, which would mean skipping church altogether in favour of napping, but realizing that small children do need certain schedules and don't have the patience or understanding of adults to simply adapt. Three hours is a long time to shift sleep. 

I do want to re-emphasize that I support the meeting format as it exists and will support keeping the status quo or changing if that's what the brethren feel is right. 

[Chilean]

When my family and I miss church, or leave right after sacrament for medical reasons, like if one of our kids is sick or something. We study the scriptures at home during church time, and watch movies or Mormon messages.

I like the fact that we can do those things at home. I feel like tour family get unified when we study together, and if the church was to take that approach (Get rid of the 3rd hour) it would be awesome!

[anatess2]

11 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

For some kids this may work and for others it may not. With my first daughter, she needed morning naps (usually around 10 am) but has never been able to sleep while people are around. We had 9 am church and spent a lot of time walking the halls trying to keep her calm. She started to adapt to staying up until 12:30 -1:00 pm when we'd get home so she could nap and the time changed to 11-2, once again her nap was disrupted and 11 am is too early to have a nap before (she seemed to do best with 2-3 hour naps). When we again changed to the 1-4 time her usual nap time had shifted to being around 2:30 pm. Sundays and church always interrupted the nap schedule her body naturally preferred. We still went to church, and still tried to let her have naps at other times, it just made for a miserable day once a week. Our second child will just cuddle up and go to sleep for the most part and hasn't been bothered one way or the other by the timing of church. I've heard of plenty of other parents with similar experiences. It's not as much about revolving around the child, which would mean skipping church altogether in favour of napping, but realizing that small children do need certain schedules and don't have the patience or understanding of adults to simply adapt. Three hours is a long time to shift sleep. 

I do want to re-emphasize that I support the meeting format as it exists and will support keeping the status quo or changing if that's what the brethren feel is right. 

I understand what you're saying.  And it's no different than what I'm saying.

In my clan, the family tradition remains which includes brutal campaign schedules (political family) and weekly family reunions with Sunday worship, etc. etc.  Everybody from the oldest to the youngest revolve around that tradition and adapts in their own way.  So, basically, we don't schedule family reunions, Sunday worship, or campaign activities to work with members of the family.  Rather, members of the family work with those things and adapt.  What I find with our clan is that we all grow up with the same tradition, so I have not experienced where one of us needs special consideration, except for that one cousin of mine who has some form of palsy.

Edited September 20, 2018 by anatess2

[Jane_Doe]

Child's naps are routinely scheduled around other things (taking other kids to school, daycare for themselves, extra-circuculars for siblings, parent's schedules, etc).  I don't see church being any different in that regard.

Now that being said, I do vividly remember the inconvenience of rescheduling naps exactly like @SpiritDragon describes.

[Just_A_Guy]

6 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

One item that has changed over the years are the policies regarding Age. For example, even though it had died out by the time I was born, a few decades prior they had an ordinance that was popular called the Second Anointing.  In those years if you had been faithful and got to the Age of 55 you could get that ordinance.  A change in leadership and it was felt that to many were having this ordinance done.  It was, for all intents and purposes, discontinued as it was being done.  It is still done today, but is a matter of election by others and rarely performed (needing a General Authority to do it I believe).

First off, referring to parts of your post that I haven’t cited here—the only real distinction I remember noticing about the High Priests in the wards where I grew up and spent much of my time as a twenty-something Elder, was that the room where they met invariably smelled terrible after one of their meetings.  (Apparently, those old guys could really “let loose” in there.)  I have never had any desire to be a part of that group, and no one has ever suggested to me that I should want to be a part of it.  This business of the high priests group as some super-duper club that everyone wanted to join, is absolutely foreign to my experience in the restored Gospel.

Second, as pertains to the above specifically:  I question the assertion that receiving the Second Anointing was ever seen either as a) a social status symbol, or b) a rite of passage to which an active Mormon was ever seen as being “entitled” to receiving on reaching a fixed age.  So far as I recall, Buerger’s seminal work on the topic makes no such assertions; and in fact suggests that the 2A has always been something that a) if you had it, you didn’t talk about it and b) a ritual that Church leadership has traditionally guarded very closely at least since the John Taylor presidency and, even at times of relatively broad administration, was still the exception rather than the rule and was typically reserved for the “very elderly”.  

Edited September 20, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Church is not everyday.  But on Church day, however it works out for your Sabbath worship.  Also, Saturday is preparation for Sunday so the Sunday schedule may need Saturday adjustments as well.

This would be the same if you work odd hours - like my sister who is a nurse working different shifts every week whose husband is a music director - works after normal business hours.  Or any other environmental conditions in your lifestyle.

This is one of the things I learned from our clan tradition.  A child develops best when the child revolves with the family (of course with the developmental necessities of the child worked into the developmental necessities of every other member of that family including grandparents - as our family is traditionally 3-generations in one household) instead of the family revolving around the child.

 

Nothing you're saying here makes any sense to me.

[Overwatch]

Oh my goodness. Those asking for four hours of church can have that. I, for one, enjoy having the rest of my Sunday to rest after church meetings and leadership meetings. I used to work all week and then "Saturday is a special day; it's the day we get ready for Sunday" so that only left Sunday as my day to partake of the sacrament, pay my tithes and give my offerings. After that I wanted to go home and rest. I used to go out with the missionaries but I got a bit burnt out. Now I have more time on my hands but still I could only imagine how exhausting it would be having a four hour block. Especially for someone who works a lot and just needs some rest. Sunday is a day or rest where we rest from our labors.

[mikbone]

Thanks!  Always looking for some good reading material.  I didnt know about this.  

David Buerger 

The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship

Dby David John Buerger

Edited September 20, 2018 by mikbone

[anatess2]

4 minutes ago, Overwatch said:

Oh my goodness. Those asking for four hours of church can have that. I, for one, enjoy having the rest of my Sunday to rest after church meetings and leadership meetings. I used to work all week and then "Saturday is a special day; it's the day we get ready for Sunday" so that only left Sunday as my day to partake of the sacrament, pay my tithes and give my offerings. After that I wanted to go home and rest. I used to go out with the missionaries but I got a bit burnt out. Now I have more time on my hands but still I could only imagine how exhausting it would be having a four hour block. Especially for someone who works a lot and just needs some rest. Sunday is a day or rest where we rest from our labors.

This is my take on the matter.  If you're exhausted on Sunday because you worked all week, then it might be that you need to make changes with "all week".  But that's just me.

[The Folk Prophet]

For the great majority of people, I expect, the declaration that they want one less hour of church so they can spend time with their families (or "rest") is garbage. For the random few who never watch TV, play video games, watch sports, hang out with friends, read, go for a drive/bike ride, exercise, meditate, or do any other type of leisure activity away from their families -- not even 1 hours a weeks worth -- and therefore have nothing else to trade off for family time -- then maybe. Unless one wants to make the argument than any of the above, including a thousand other things, are MORE important than church...the argument holds little water.

[Vort]

34 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

the room where they met invariably smelled terrible after one of their meetings.  (Apparently, those old guys could really “let loose” in there.)

tmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmitmi

[Vort]

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

This business of the high priests group as some super-duper club that everyone wanted to join, is absolutely foreign to my experience in the restored Gospel.

Ditto.

36 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I question the assertion that receiving the Second Anointing was ever seen either as a) a social status symbol, or b) a rite of passage to which an active Mormon was ever seen as being “entitled” to receiving on reaching a fixed age.

I agree completely.

37 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

So far as I recall, Buerger’s seminal work on the topic makes no such assertions; and in fact suggests that the 2A has always been something that a) if you had it, you didn’t talk about it and b) a ritual that Church leadership has traditionally guarded very closely at least since the John Taylor presidency and, even at times of relatively broad administration, was still the exception rather than the rule and was typically reserved for the “very elderly”.  

I remember my paternal grandmother telling me on a couple of separate instances that her father received his "second anointing", but that other than telling her that fact, he never spoke of it. He would have been middle aged (at least) when this happened. So I'm not sure what that was all about, but assuming she understood him correctly, that would be anecdotal evidence in support of what you say.

[anatess2]

24 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Nothing you're saying here makes any sense to me.

It's very simple.  Church is from X to Y.  Every Sunday.  If your ward is like mine, the schedule only changes once a year (not counting the time change for Daylight Savings Time).  Therefore, having the family revolve around the child means - the child has to nap in the middle of Primary or he gets cranky.  Whereas, having the child revolve with the family means - the family goes to Church so the child adapts to not napping when he is in Primary.  It's pretty rare for a child to grow up with a tradition and continue to be cranky about it.  At least in my clan, it doesn't happen except for special medical needs.

Edited September 20, 2018 by anatess2

[Traveler]

The purpose of the church is to prepare for living in the society of heaven.  Paul addresses this idea in his letter to the Hebrews.  In Chapter 5 Paul draws the connection between our Sabbath activities as a type and shadow of how we will choose to live in eternity.   I would also point out the goal of eternity is not to attend church - rather the reason we attend church is to become enlightened for living an exalted eternal life.  Specifically we are instructed that the family is the basic structure of the Celestial Kingdom - not the church.  Thus the great calling in the priesthood is that of father - it is the same title of G-d.  Likewise the great calling of women is the calling of mother (not Relief Society President).  Neither the man nor the woman is complete (perfect) without the everlasting covenant of marriage.

The only reason there is a church structure is to support what should be taking place in the home.  Many religious types (Christians) have this 180 degrees off - that is that the idea is that family is an institution created to support the church and church needs and activity.  This heresy has so bleed over into current Latter-day Saint culture that many think the reason for a Sabbath is to attend church meetings.  Thus when church is over so is the Sabbath and the remainder of the day can be used for "worldly" pursuits.   I have always had the notion of Sunday dress and Sunday best - and so I wear a white shirt and tie (summer - suit fall, winter and spring).  Outside of members like stake presidents and bishops that are in church meetings all Sabbath - I am almost always the only one that seems to think of the Sabbath as an all day devotion.  I realize that dressing for the Sabbath is not the singular goal of a Sabbath but I believe there is a reason missionaries have a dress code and I believe there are spiritual ramifications.  

I also believe the Sabbath should be a covenant - Church can be part of you covenant but if that is the extent of the covenant - I believe you will struggle with many important elements, not just of the Sabbath but family and life of covenant in general.  

One last thought - I think changes are necessary and more are coming - it is all to prepare for a 1000 year Sabbath that is called the millennium.

 

The Traveler 

[Overwatch]

12 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

For the great majority of people, I expect, the declaration that they want one less hour of church so they can spend time with their families (or "rest") is garbage. For the random few who never watch TV, play video games, watch sports, hang out with friends, read, go for a drive/bike ride, exercise, meditate, or do any other type of leisure activity away from their families -- not even 1 hours a weeks worth -- and therefore have nothing else to trade off for family time -- then maybe. Unless one wants to make the argument than any of the above, including a thousand other things, are MORE important than church...the argument holds little water.

And so does going to the other extreme. Feel free to strap a Book of Mormon to your forehead and count your steps on Sunday too. A four hour church block (not even counting council) is quite excessive. As far as a two hour block? Thank goodness. More time for me and my family, since you know, we should be serving our neighbors at all times and not just on Sundays.

[The Folk Prophet]

5 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Whereas, having the child revolve with the family means - the family goes to Church so the child adapts to not napping when he is in Primary.  

I call bologna.

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I call bologna.

I can't stand bologna.  Prosciutto I like.

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I call bologna.

P.S.  What you call bologna is actually one of the main differences between American and Asian parenting.

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, Overwatch said:

And so does going to the other extreme. 

Who said anything about the other extreme?

Just now, Overwatch said:

Feel free to strap a Book of Mormon to your forehead and count your steps on Sunday too. 

What?

1 minute ago, Overwatch said:

A four hour church block (not even counting council) is quite excessive. 

I didn't say anything about four hour church block.

[Vort]

Just now, anatess2 said:

I can't stand bologna.  Prosciutto I like.

I traveled through Bologna on may way to and from my first (and also last) town in Italy. Not actually in my mission borders, so I always felt vaguely outlaw. Industrial city, not as beautiful as Florence, but I'm sure very charming in its own way. I never saw anything outside the railway station and immediate vicinity. I do remember one particular part of the station, where a bomb had gone off in 1980 (about three years before I was there). It had been preserved in its post-bombing state as a sort of memorial. I thought it was sad and vaguely ghastly, and thanked the Lord that I lived in a country where we didn't have to memorialize terrorist activities.

Ah, the good old days of innocence...

[anatess2]

5 minutes ago, Overwatch said:

And so does going to the other extreme. Feel free to strap a Book of Mormon to your forehead and count your steps on Sunday too. A four hour church block (not even counting council) is quite excessive. As far as a two hour block? Thank goodness. More time for me and my family, since you know, we should be serving our neighbors at all times and not just on Sundays.

Well... we have different measures for what is "Extreme".  Church in my house is a family affair so it's family time.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, anatess2 said:

P.S.  What you call bologna is actually one of the main differences between American and Asian parenting.

I don't know what you're talking about. What I do know is that children don't just "get used to" being tired and therefore magically stop being cranky that one day a week where they don't get the nap they actually need. If church falls during nap time, sure...the child doesn't get their nap...and may or may not sleep after church or before. Either way, it messes things up. That's just the way it is. But it is the way it is.

[anatess2]

Just now, Vort said:

I traveled through Bologna on may way to and from my first (and also last) town in Italy. Not actually in my mission borders, so I always felt vaguely outlaw. Industrial city, not as beautiful as Florence, but I'm sure very charming in its own way. I never saw anything outside the railway station and immediate vicinity. I do remember one particular part of the station, where a bomb had gone off in 1980 (about three years before I was there). It had been preserved in its post-bombing state as a sort of memorial. I thought it was sad and vaguely ghastly, and thanked the Lord that I lived in a country where we didn't have to memorialize terrorist activities.

Ah, the good old days of innocence...

Actually.... you have those 2 big holes in Manhattan...

But I get what you're saying.  Italy is awesome but I really do believe the USA is the best country on the planet.