LDS Reverence...What purpose?

Post by **_Roger Morrison** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:25 pm

Attended a small, new Community Church, past Sunday. Kind of homey, and casual with a lot smiles, conviviality, and coffee...

When the Pastor, a well educated, personable man in his early 50's, called the Sunday School to reconviene, a boy maybe 6-8 hopped down the stairs of the lecture hall of the small College they meet in. To a few chuckles and some surprise. But no reprimands, or scolding looks.

I harkened back to my LDS days of seeing kids marched with arms folded to Junior SS. Then as Deacons et al, uniformed as best they could be in white shirts and ties. After passing sacrament a noble, serious member of the Bishopric, congratulated them on their "reverence"...

It dawned on me the covert purpose in such regimentation: Discourage individuality while demanding conformity. The result, generally speaking, is not only a demonstration of 'obedience' but the loss of personal identity that the above mentioned boy was free to display.

Gotta wonder, when "God" made us like snow-flakes, no two exactly the same, why does LDSism feel it necessary to have such cookie-cutter-conformity? Is somber truly reverence? How else can reverence be demonstrated? Is it really in "God's" cards or simply another ace man uses in his game? Thoughts? Warm regards, Roger

_Yoda · Post by **_Yoda** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:40 pm

Actually, I've had the opposite reaction from folks. I grew up in a predominantly Catholic community. Every once in a while, I would have a friend spend the night, and attend Church with me.

Many of them were taken aback by the crying and unruly kids running around in the hall during Sacrament Meeting.

One friend told me that if she had acted that way during Church, she would have been beaten until she couldn't sit anymore.

To me, the main problem with Church is how long it is. 3 hours is just way too long for small children to have to sit with their arms folded. It's ridiculous!

For my hyperactive 3 year old, I always bring my backpack full of quiet toys, crayons, coloring books, crackers and other snacks, and I still end up out in the hall with him...Usually about half way through the meeting, he's sitting on my lap, watching "Star Wars" on my video IPOD.

;)

Post by **_moksha** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:46 pm

Roger, I think you are right. Somberness is not reverence. Seems to me that joyousness should be the most spiritual attitude. As for young kids, I still think a giant hamster wheel in the gym would be helpful.

Post by **_Some Schmo** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:02 pm

But Roger, you misunderstand... you have the agency to be whomever you want to be. If you choose to be who you are, well, you run the risk of never being with your heavenly father again... but hey, you have a choice!

Isn't the church just peachy-keen dandy?

_Yoda · Post by **_Yoda** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:09 pm

moksha wrote:Roger, I think you are right. Somberness is not reverence. Seems to me that joyousness should be the most spiritual attitude. As for young kids, I still think a giant hamster wheel in the gym would be helpful.

I like this idea!

;)

Post by **_karl61** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:11 pm

Roger:

I can relate big time. For me doing this passive-aggresive type behavior can make a person very angry if they are asked very kindly, very softly, can they please do this and this and this..when they don't want to......One time in about 1975, our ward aaronic priesthood progam was the example for the whole stake to follow. We all had white shirts, haircuts etc., but looking back we were probaly the most angry group of kids in the stake. One time at some stake priesthood meeting they had us all stand up to do some kind of count and then later during the meeting when someone was speaking, he asked "how many of you young men are going on a mission" and of course all ten of us stood up like good little teachers. It probaly would have been better for me, when asked about the mission issue, to have stood up on the bench and yelled FU** YOU. It would have been good therapy which is what I needed at that age.

regards,

thestyleguy

Post by **_Doctor Steuss** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:32 pm

Sometimes I wonder how much of our worship is due to the prevalence of 19th Century American Protestantism within the roots of Mormonism in lieu of what is truly pleasing in the sight of G-d.

I for one would love some "Gospel" singing once in a while.

Post by **_karl61** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:58 pm

Doctor Steuss wrote:Sometimes I wonder how much of our worship is due to the prevalence of 19th Century American Protestantism within the roots of Mormonism in lieu of what is truly pleasing in the sight of G-d.

I for one would love some "Gospel" singing once in a while.

well one thing: Mormonism today is the type that the protestants wanted. In the beginning the protestants wrote the laws and Joseph Smith and his friends tried to find loop holes so they could create and keep the power whether it was obtaining a charter or creating their own courts. Once that was observed it was a chess game until the church got cornered in the early 1900's at the Reed Smoot hearings when the protestants yelled check and in 1978 when they called checkmate.

Post by **_harmony** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:01 pm

Doctor Steuss wrote:Sometimes I wonder how much of our worship is due to the prevalence of 19th Century American Protestantism within the roots of Mormonism in lieu of what is truly pleasing in the sight of G-d.

I for one would love some "Gospel" singing once in a while.

AMEN! Sing it, Steuss!

Post by **_Roger Morrison** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:01 am

liz3564 wrote:Actually, I've had the opposite reaction from folks. I grew up in a predominantly Catholic community. Every once in a while, I would have a friend spend the night, and attend Church with me.

Many of them were taken aback by the crying and unruly kids running around in the hall during Sacrament Meeting.

One friend told me that if she had acted that way during Church, she would have been beaten until she couldn't sit anymore.

To me, the main problem with Church is how long it is. (Really? :-) 3 hours is just way too long for small children to have to sit with their arms folded.
For my hyperactive 3 year old, I always bring my backpack full of quiet toys, crayons, coloring books, crackers and other snacks, and I still end up out in the hall with him...Usually about half way through the meeting, he's sitting on my lap, watching "Star Wars" on my video IPOD. (Bold added by RM)

;)

Liz: 35-64? I gotta ask, meaning no offence, of course, what measurements are they? IF, the sultry, savvy avitar is anything like You, i just cannot fit You in with, "...my backpack full of quiet toys, crayons, coloring books, crackers and other snacks, and I still end up out in the hall with him...Usually about half way through the meeting, he's sitting on my lap, watching "Star Wars" on my video IPOD. ROTFL))))))) Ya gotta be kidding!!??!!

YOU is THE stereotypical MO-Mom... Repent! Pass out, "It's ridiculous!" stickers to all yer Sisses in representation of all of those suffering "3 year old(s)"! Com'on Liz, get down to Biz! Warm regards, of course, Roger :-)))))