M E R I D I A N     M A G A Z I N E

Turning Up the Volume on a Christmas Request
By Kathryn H. Kidd

First, the Primary president:

In your latest column on reverence in sacrament meeting, several people commented that perhaps the Primary president could do games or incentives to reinforce to the children about being reverent:  In our Primary handbook (Church Handbook of Instructions, book 2, p. 239) we are instructed:

Primary leaders, teachers, and children should strive to create a reverent atmosphere.  As leaders and teachers evaluate the needs of the children, they can plan ways to encourage reverence in Primary.  Charts, graphs, or contests that attempt to measure reverence among classes or individuals are not appropriate.

As a stake Primary president, and former ward Primary president, (and wife of a bishopric member and mom of five), I understand the frustration that irreverence can bring, both to children, parents, and others in the ward.  Our ward (and stake) has struggled with reverence in sacrament meeting and Primary (and other meetings as well.) Many Sundays I have commented to my husband the sadness I feel when I see and hear our most sacred meeting in the Church (sacrament meeting) defiled.

But lately I have come to understand that as long as I teach my children appropriate behavior, and focus on my own worthiness to participate in the sacrament, I can feel the spirit no matter what is happening around me.

That being said, we all have a responsibility to teach one another, love one another, and seek the Lord's help and direction.  Could we not make this concern a matter of a special fast?  Could we not sincerely counsel together as stake and ward councils, as auxiliary presidencies, as parents, and as families about how we can show the deep love, respect, awe, and reverence for Jesus Christ?

Next year in Primary, the children will be learning a beautiful song by Sally Deford —"If The Savior Stood Beside Me":

If the Savior stood beside me, would I do the things I do?
Would I think of His commandments and try harder to be true?

Would I follow His example?  Would I live more righteously
If I could see the Savior standing nigh, watching over me?

If the Savior stood beside me, would I say the things I say?
Would my words be kind and true if He were never far away?

Would I try to share the gospel? Would I speak more reverently?

If I could see the Savior standing nigh, watching over me?

He is always near me, though I do not see Him there,
And because He loves me dearly, I am in His watchful care.

So I'll be the kind of person that I know I'd like to be
If I could see the Savior standing nigh watching over me.

If we all used these words as a guideline for our lives, what a more beautiful, reverent, loving world this would be! 

A Primary president in Utah

Thanks for writing, Primary. Your point about reverence contests was enlightening. I was intrigued with the wording, though. It was very carefully written (as such documents should be!). The part that caught my eye was this:

Charts, graphs, or contests that attempt to measure reverence among classes or individuals are not appropriate.

My question is in regard to the portion of the sentence that I put in italics. I am wondering if the problem here is not that we play reverence games , but that we make it a competition by measuring who is doing the best job. I can certainly see how turning reverence into a contest where egos are involved and there are reverence "winners" would certainly defeat the purpose.

However, it may be that coming up with a catchy way to instill quietude without making a competition out of it might not be against the guidelines. I can interpret that sentence both ways.

Please, readers, don't write in with opinions on the question (unless you were in on the manual-writing process and are in a position to know), because this is something that could turn into an endless debate. As with so many church-related procedures and even doctrines, we Latter-day Saints are given the minimum we need in order to make informed decisions, and interpretation is left up to us —based on the circumstances in our particular situation. (Oh, the joys and angst of agency!)

***

Our second topic today is something that could be considered the flip-side of reverence: What if meetings aren't loud enough? I'll let the reader broach the idea in his own words:

Question 1: Should you say "amen" following a prayer you have not heard?

Question 2: Should you feel bad about skipping a class when you can't hear what participants are saying because they speak so softly someone two rows in front of them can't hear what they say?

Something I find extremely annoying is to sit in a class where the person asked to say an opening or closing prayer speaks so softly you can't hear one word of what they say, even if you sit less than four feet away (I'm not exaggerating at all here)!  The Lord doesn't hear us by means of acoustic energy in the air, but fellow class members have no other method available to determine what was said before they are expected to say, "So be it."

When you are asked to pray in a classroom setting, you have a responsibility to speak up so every person in the room can clearly hear what you say ? especially if they do not have any hearing impairments.  If you speak so softly your words can't even reach the ceiling, how is the Lord supposed to hear —much less those sitting across the chapel in gospel doctrine, or even the other side of the Relief Society room?

Some rooms are draped with curtains and sound-absorbing wall coverings that absorb high frequencies in speech that are critical to the listener's ability to discriminate sounds.  There are times I can hear people talking just fine, but the acoustical "deadness" of the room makes it impossible to understand what they say.  It is especially frustrating when they don't pop their "P"s and "D"s and other percussive consonants.  "I ca eveh ear wha you sai" is what was heard when you really said, "I can't even hear what you said."

And when in class discussions, speak so all can hear, not just the teacher.  This is especially important if you sit on the front row near the teacher and those in the back of the room cannot hear what you say ? even those with excellent hearing.

I always try to speak up and project my voice so all can hear. Communication is not simply speaking so you can be understood by most of the class.  It is speaking so you cannot be misunderstood by anyone in the class.

How many people become discouraged and quit attending class (or even church) because they get nothing out of it?  I know one individual who told me he has exceptionally good hearing, but quit going to gospel doctrine class because he couldn't understand what others were saying in the large chapel area, and members insisted on sitting all over the room instead of being together in the front rows.

What do you do when you are asked to teach such a class and you can't understand the comments of someone way back in the room more than fifty or sixty feet away?  Do you "fake" it?  Do you ask them to
speak up?  You already asked those in the back to come forward, but they made it clear they were declining the invitation.

Are you "sustaining" a teacher you voted on previously in sacrament meeting when you don't help by moving closer?

These are questions that deserve serious contemplation.

Clarke Echols
Loveland, Colorado

You make excellent points, Clarke. And in fact your letter was so well worded that you said everything that needed to be said, so there's no discussion needed.

Anyone whose ward has a problem with mumblers in meetings may want to take a copy of this letter to church and have it read in the appropriate class —or maybe even have it published in the ward bulletin. There are lots of mumblers in our wards who have never considered that the sisal on the walls and the acoustical tiles on the ceiling that have been put there to muffle the loud noises are also muffling the sage comments they make in their classes. Your letter is an excellent reminder of something we need to hear on a regular basis. Thanks for writing.

***

And now, as promised, a Christmas question posed by a reader who needs ideas. She needs your help, and you may be the one with just the suggestion that will help her:

What ideas do you have for missionary Christmas gifts (practical and fun) for those assigned within the United States or other areas where it is easy for them to purchase many items such as favorite cereal, socks, and so on.  I'd like to include some fun items in a “care package” but also don't want to send them useless stuff that takes up a lot of space that they then have to haul around on each transfer or give away. 

My older son who likes to cook sent numerous kitchen appliances home from his mission that his companions had given or sold him after receiving them as gifts.  I was surprised to see people had sent missionaries a waffle maker, rice maker, George Foreman grill, bread maker, and so on. 

Internet shopping works well because I don't have to package and ship it.

Help!  All I'm coming up with is Mormon Tabernacle Choir CD's and I sent those last year.

Arlene Butler

Okay —there you have it. We finally have a topic that is easy and fun. No landmines here! Arlene is just looking for ways to make people happy, and that's something that should appeal to all of us (not just as Christmas approaches, but at any time of the year).

Although we are not looking for letters about reverence, or about Primary manuals, or even about people speaking up (or not speaking up) in church, we are looking for help for good old Arlene. If you have any suggestions for her, or even suggestions for people who are looking for gifts for people who are serving overseas missions, please send them to circleofsisters@meridianmagazine.com . Put something in the subject line that will let me know your letter isn't spam. And when you write, be sure to include your full name, city and state or province. (If you'd rather be semi-anonymous, sign your name as “A Reader from Michigan” or “Sandy from Timbuktu.” The important thing is that we hear from you.)