I learned in church today

[Eddie]

If the church doesn't want people bringing snacks/food into sacrament then they should not hold sacrament from 11:00am to 12:10pm and if they want to outlaw all snacks during church then we need a 2 hour block. Cleaning the chapel sucks, especially when people have crushed Cheerios and the like into teh carpets, but it's a small price to pay for some peace and quiet during the meeting.

I generally don't have a problem with people who bring snacks for kids to church, and did so myself when my kids were young.

But a little introspection tells me that I do have a problem with how some folks proceed with this. Some snacks to tide kids over are great. Families that seem to bring an entire picnic lunch to sacrament meeting are too much for me. Feed your kids before church. Feed them again after. In the middle they'll need some snacks, but not a full meal. (And in all honesty - I don't care if someone brings a full meal. So long as they can eat it without distracting everyone around them or leaving a big mess.)

For me - a bigger deal than bringing food itself - is what they bring and how they go about eating it. Could folks pay just a little attention to what they are bringing for their child and the potential mess they will be leaving behind?

When folks hand their 18 month-old a jelly sandwich or a juice box or applesauce and a spoon and leave them sitting on the fabric pew seats, they're just PLANNING on leaving it sticky for the rest of us. If that's what you want to bring - great. But set out a blanket for the kid or keep them on your lap.

Fish crackers and cheerios are great - but would is it too much to ask that parents paying a little attention to their environment and attempt to pick up the ones that their kids drop before they are stepped on? I know they'll miss some - but many make no effort and there are a dozen cheerios on the bench and floor when they get up to leave. Can't they just take a look around and pick up after themselves?

Would anyone act that way visiting a friends home? (I mean, leaving their kid's cheerios on the floor or let them smear a jelly sandwich on the couch) If not - they why assume that is proper at church?

I must also admit a bias against parents that bring a ton of snacks for kids over the age of 8. I won't begrudge the kid a little something they can discreetly eat - but families packing a meal for older kids seems a little much.

Another option is to stop being cheapskates and hire back the professional cleaning employees they laid off about a decade ago. I know they've got the money....

I don't know how true this is, but part of me thinks that one of the reasons for this ties into the concept that people tend to take better care of something once they take ownership of it. I like to think that this move was made not to save money - but with the belief that putting members in charge of the cleaning would lead to greater awareness and ultimately folks taking better care of the building.

I could be wrong. This may have been all about saving money. I don't know if it was or wasn't, I just like to believe that some small portion of it related to hopes for improved treatment of church facilities.

That said - I suspect that the folks who are the greatest problem with regard to taking care of the building are not the ones showing up to clean it every week.

[Omaha 680]

Just my two cents on goldfish crackers, perfumes, or other such counsel given by local leaders. In my stake it would probably be grooming. Up until very recently I wore my hair much longer than a missionary haircut and I know this is something that our Stake Presidency does not appreciate.

Anyway, my feeling is if you receive counsel on something that is clearly local preference (ie something that is not a Temple Recommend question), you decide how much of it to practice in to your life. If I am asked to do something that is annoying but otherwise really doesn't disrupt my life, I try to do it because it is easier for everyone involved. But if it is something I feel really is important or worse would be detrimental to my family, I reserve the right to peacefully do it my way. The key for me is I make a decision and then be happy with it. In the case of goldfish crackers I would continue bringing them, but clean my area thoroughly after the meeting so there couldn't be any reasonable complaint. If the talks continued I would tune them out. Chances are very good that would be the end of it. In the unlikely event that a local leader chose to call me out personally, I would deal with it in private at that time. But absent that singling out, I don't think it is productive for us to stress about these things if we have decided not to do them. I realize it can be frustrating and we can feel attacked, but I think a more laid back response makes me much happier and enjoy church much more.

[Eddie]

I would be nearly as annoyed as you if someone gave that talk in my ward. I was annoyed when our bishop made a few comments about needing to keep small kids quieter in sacrament. The problem in our ward is that it is a new subdivision and most of the people are in their late 20s and 30s, so we have 3 nurseries, a gigantic primary, and few youth. So it's not gonna be silent in sacrament meeting.

But as to your bolded remark, I don't understand how parent with a couple of small children requiring snacks can much participate in sacrament anyway. My own experience is that I've not really heard more than 3 or 4 full talks in the past 4 years.

I've been in wards in which the Bishop asked families to quickly take noisy children out during Sacrament Meeting. I've also been in wards in which the Bishop asked parents not to leave simply because their child was noisy and to stick it out. I thought it was funny that we'd hear two different opposing directives regarding noisy kids.

In our current ward during one meeting our Bishop was concerned about young families not coming due to the children being a distraction and the subsequent drop in attendance and brought it up. One of the elderly there, who misunderstood, mentioned that due to their age many of the elderly have hearing issues and can't hear anything being said when their are noisy children in the congregation - and that some had mentioned to him that this was why they didn't attend or went into the foyer.

I thought it was funny that the Bishop was talking about a drop in attendance due to young children - and this elderly brother took it to mean that there was a drop in the elderly attending due to young children.

[Blueintheface]

I learned that it's probably time for me to be released as GD teacher. We had two visitors who were driving me nuts. One criticized a local church for running a bookstore and restaurant at their church, so I did something I never thought I'd do--I went all City Creek on him right then and there. Then another lady said that we can't teach kids that faith in Christ is sufficient, but they have to do good deeds first and foremost and that faith was secondary. I said, "That just seems bass ackwards to me." Then people said, "Faith without works is dead," and I said, "works without faith are dead too." Started a minor uproar, and I want out.

Sometimes I wish I could remove "impetuousness" from my list of "talents".

I'm also the GD teacher (no double entendre intended) and while I enjoy it more than you, I miss Primary immensely. Despite the headaches following 2 hours of a dozen 6 year olds, it is nothing compared to the frustration I feel at times during certain gospel doctrine lessons. Last week was Isaiah. I might have well have been talking about GAAP.

[mUUser]

Wow, I didn't realize so many people got this worked up over their 3 hours at church every week.

Frankly, it's the time spent on church outside the 3 hours that festers my hide.

[Green Monstah]

Eh, I think I'd rather go the passive-aggressive route and be quietly defiant. Maybe write an anonymous note or something. Or purposely leave goldfish cracker crumbs beneath the pew.

The next time he speaks, you should stuff your mouth full of goldfish and eat them cookie monster style (grunts included).

[Green Monstah]

I'm also the GD teacher (no double entendre intended) and while I enjoy it more than you, I miss Primary immensely. Despite the headaches following 2 hours of a dozen 6 year olds, it is nothing compared to the frustration I feel at times during certain gospel doctrine lessons. Last week was Isaiah. I might have well have been talking about GAAP.

I have enjoyed the calling overall, but I reached a boiling point yesterday and I think it's time for a change.

[BigPiney]

Just my two cents on goldfish crackers, perfumes, or other such counsel given by local leaders. In my stake it would probably be grooming. Up until very recently I wore my hair much longer than a missionary haircut and I know this is something that our Stake Presidency does not appreciate.

Anyway, my feeling is if you receive counsel on something that is clearly local preference (ie something that is not a Temple Recommend question), you decide how much of it to practice in to your life. If I am asked to do something that is annoying but otherwise really doesn't disrupt my life, I try to do it because it is easier for everyone involved. But if it is something I feel really is important or worse would be detrimental to my family, I reserve the right to peacefully do it my way. The key for me is I make a decision and then be happy with it. In the case of goldfish crackers I would continue bringing them, but clean my area thoroughly after the meeting so there couldn't be any reasonable complaint. If the talks continued I would tune them out. Chances are very good that would be the end of it. In the unlikely event that a local leader chose to call me out personally, I would deal with it in private at that time. But absent that singling out, I don't think it is productive for us to stress about these things if we have decided not to do them. I realize it can be frustrating and we can feel attacked, but I think a more laid back response makes me much happier and enjoy church much more.

I like this approach. When I was the EQP, one week I wore a blue shirt to Church. The Bishop came into our quorum meeting and said that we need to be wearing the "uniform of the priesthood". I was the only one there not wearing a white shirt, so yes he was calling me out in front of everyone. he did not handle it well, but I know he was a good man trying to do what he thought was right. Despite my wanting to never wear white again, I decided to support him in my little way and made an attempt to always wear a white shirt from that point forward. The guy was bishop for 9 years, I figured I could deal with it for a couple of years.

The current EQP wears colored shirts all the time and even helps pass the sacrament wearing them. Oh the horror! I haven't said anything to him, because I don't care and don't think it is important. If he is there, that is all I care about.

Yesterday I learned that if I go out of town, all hell breaks loose at Church. We had a transient family set up a camper in the parking lot and harass members and counselors in bishopric looking for aid. Luckily they didn't show up until church ended. Had another transient not show up to church like I had arranged. Had a member pass away, this wasn't at church. Had a member of the YM presidency, who possibly has started to show signs of dementia, go into the RS meeting right before it was to start and completely berate the RS sisters for failing to be nice to his new wife of 2 years, who also joined the church at that time. She has stayed for Relief society once in that time, and he claims that because the sisters have not befriended her enough, that is why she leaves after sunday school.

Going to be a long week.

[Jacob]

Wow, I didn't realize so many people got this worked up over their 3 hours at church every week.

Frankly, it's the time spent on church outside the 3 hours that festers my hide.

I only go for the 3 hours (usually less), so I've nothing to complain about otherwise.

[Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz]

I generally don't have a problem with people who bring snacks for kids to church, and did so myself when my kids were young.

But a little introspection tells me that I do have a problem with how some folks proceed with this. Some snacks to tide kids over are great. Families that seem to bring an entire picnic lunch to sacrament meeting are too much for me. Feed your kids before church. Feed them again after. In the middle they'll need some snacks, but not a full meal. (And in all honesty - I don't care if someone brings a full meal. So long as they can eat it without distracting everyone around them or leaving a big mess.)

For me - a bigger deal than bringing food itself - is what they bring and how they go about eating it. Could folks pay just a little attention to what they are bringing for their child and the potential mess they will be leaving behind?

When folks hand their 18 month-old a jelly sandwich or a juice box or applesauce and a spoon and leave them sitting on the fabric pew seats, they're just PLANNING on leaving it sticky for the rest of us. If that's what you want to bring - great. But set out a blanket for the kid or keep them on your lap.

Fish crackers and cheerios are great - but would is it too much to ask that parents paying a little attention to their environment and attempt to pick up the ones that their kids drop before they are stepped on? I know they'll miss some - but many make no effort and there are a dozen cheerios on the bench and floor when they get up to leave. Can't they just take a look around and pick up after themselves?

Would anyone act that way visiting a friends home? (I mean, leaving their kid's cheerios on the floor or let them smear a jelly sandwich on the couch) If not - they why assume that is proper at church?

I must also admit a bias against parents that bring a ton of snacks for kids over the age of 8. I won't begrudge the kid a little something they can discreetly eat - but families packing a meal for older kids seems a little much.



I don't know how true this is, but part of me thinks that one of the reasons for this ties into the concept that people tend to take better care of something once they take ownership of it. I like to think that this move was made not to save money - but with the belief that putting members in charge of the cleaning would lead to greater awareness and ultimately folks taking better care of the building.

I could be wrong. This may have been all about saving money. I don't know if it was or wasn't, I just like to believe that some small portion of it related to hopes for improved treatment of church facilities.

That said - I suspect that the folks who are the greatest problem with regard to taking care of the building are not the ones showing up to clean it every week.

:thumbsup:

[Jeff Lebowski]

I am having a tough time thinking of a sillier or more inconsequential thing for a stake presidency to be concerned about.

[sparky]

We had a cool visitor at priesthood OE. There is an Islamic Bosniak chapel a couple of miles down the road from ours. The new minister (?) of that congregation showed up, not sure if he was a walk-in or if he contacted someone beforehand.

Anyway the bishop asked him for the customary self-introduction, and he proceeded to give a really profound speech, in thick Bosnian accent, on how we are all trying to do the right thing, regardless of Muslim or Mormon faith. He said the reason for the visit was that he was concerned with some of the choices made by the youth of his congregation, and wanted to build a relationship with the LDS church and learn how we do our youth programs. He ended up going to HP so I didn't see him after that. I thought it was really cool, and I hope the missionaries didn't get the wrong idea and pounce on him.

[DrumNFeather]

I am having a tough time thinking of a sillier or more inconsequential thing for a stake presidency to be concerned about.

How about the bow-tie epidemic? I'd like to see something done about THAT!

[SoCalCoug]

I am having a tough time thinking of a sillier or more inconsequential thing for a stake presidency to be concerned about.

Particularly where he admitted our ward is doing a good job showing up on Saturday mornings to clean the building. However he called us to repentance (his words) for not coming through on our Tuesday evening cleaning assignments as well as we should.

[SoCalCoug]

Just my two cents on goldfish crackers, perfumes, or other such counsel given by local leaders. In my stake it would probably be grooming. Up until very recently I wore my hair much longer than a missionary haircut and I know this is something that our Stake Presidency does not appreciate.

Anyway, my feeling is if you receive counsel on something that is clearly local preference (ie something that is not a Temple Recommend question), you decide how much of it to practice in to your life. If I am asked to do something that is annoying but otherwise really doesn't disrupt my life, I try to do it because it is easier for everyone involved. But if it is something I feel really is important or worse would be detrimental to my family, I reserve the right to peacefully do it my way. The key for me is I make a decision and then be happy with it. In the case of goldfish crackers I would continue bringing them, but clean my area thoroughly after the meeting so there couldn't be any reasonable complaint. If the talks continued I would tune them out. Chances are very good that would be the end of it. In the unlikely event that a local leader chose to call me out personally, I would deal with it in private at that time. But absent that singling out, I don't think it is productive for us to stress about these things if we have decided not to do them. I realize it can be frustrating and we can feel attacked, but I think a more laid back response makes me much happier and enjoy church much more.

In last year's ward conference, the same SP counselor called out a brand new member (baptized the previous evening) during his discussion of wearing white shirts (as a way to show respect for the sacrament) by saying he was confident that Brother R (who is on disability for an injury sustained on the bomb squad in Afghanistan and who is raising three young boys alone because his wife is in jail for trying to murder him, and who was wearing a nice blue shirt that day) would be wearing a white shirt the following Sunday.

We have another new member, a 16-year-old who happens to have long hair, and who happened to be blessing the sacrament yesterday - I was afraid Pres. C was going to call him out - fortunately (I guess) he was more focused on calling out the mothers with snacks in their diaper bags.