The Transcript of My Sacrament Meeting Talk--Part II

[Sleeping in EQ]

Therein it is appropriate that the sacrament, a renewal of our baptismal covenants and acceptance of the Lord Jesus Christ, varies every week. This is in some measure a result of its being spoken aloud by the priesthood holder, the voice of the priest going forth whole from his body to the ears of all who hear (Mark 4: 9) just as the bread is broken and disseminated to the congregants, just as the drops of water represent Christ’s bleeding on our behalf, and just as the seed of the gospel is scattered on the ground (Matt. 13: 3-9). But it is also in the words the priests’ speak. For while they may strive for sameness in their recitation there is always difference: They pronounce some words more clearly than others, speed up and slow down, pause for emphasis or to swallow, crack their voices, breathe, sigh, and clear their throats in the microphone. Their voices can be low or high, and sometimes during the same prayer! I love listening to their voices and to the way their speech draws me to think about one part of the Gospel and then another. They’re most always the best two talks in sacrament meeting. God hears the words of their mouths and we should too.

In this sense striving for sameness nonetheless reveals difference in that while we partake of the same ordinance together and simultaneously—we commune as we take communion, if you will, we are in communication—we nonetheless do so from very different circumstances. Some are eager to partake, feeling like they’ve made spiritual progress this week. Others partake desperately, knowing that they have done wrong but are ready to recommit themselves. Still others eat and drink despite flagging faith, out of habit, or because they feel it is expected of them. Like Eve and Adam having partaken of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, we now have reasoned to partake of the fruit of the tree of life, Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Sin separates us from God. That all are reconciled to the Father through the Word as vocalized by the priests is an act of at-one-ment, our sameness is in our iniquity and our need for the Savior, our differences are the particular circumstances and experiences with which we grapple, and the talents we use to grapple them.
So the sacrament is, metaphorically speaking, a replication of the miracle of Jesus’ feeding the multitudes with but a few loaves and fishes (Matt. 14: 19, 15: 34; Mark 6: 41-43, 8: 7, Luke 9: 16, John 6: 11)). We eat but a small morsel and are filled. We sip from a tiny, plastic cup of everlasting water and never thirst (John 4: 14). We are the baskets that are filled and with more to spare.

I conclude with an emphasis on the suffering of Christ in our behalf, and one aspect of how he prepared to do it. For while one could consider most any moment from his baptism onward as preparation to atone for our sins, and even his pre-mortal activities, the last thing he did before the chain of events that began at Gethsemane and ended on the cross was sing a hymn with his apostles. Mark and Matthew (who was probably quoting Mark’s gospel) write that, “And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives” (Mark 14: 26; Matt. 26: 30). Consistent with the Song of the Three Children in the Apocrypha purported to have been sung by Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego (v. 66) while in the fiery furnace, and John Taylor’s rendition of A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief at Carthage, Jesus finds strength and purpose as he communes with his friends and followers in song.

Next to the sacrament itself, hymn singing is typically the holiest and most atoning moment in our sacrament meetings, and perhaps in our lives. Jeremiah wrote that in the last days Israel “shall come and sing in the height of Zion, and shall flow together to the goodness of the Lord…and their soul shall be as a watered garden…” (Jer. 31: 12). Lehi’s vision of God on his throne describes him surrounded by innumerable angels in song and praise (1 Ne. 1: 8). The Nephites delivered from King Noah sang redeeming love and were saved (Alma 5: 9). Paul wrote to the Romans that for the mercy of God he would “confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto” God’s name (Rom. 15: 9). George Manwaring’s lyrics describe bees humming, sweet birds singing, and music ringing through the grove (Hymn #26). The Lord told Emma Smith, “my soul delighteth in the song of the heart; yea, the song of the righteous is a prayer unto me, and it shall be answered with a blessing upon their heads” (D&C 25: 12). Doctrine & Covenants 109 implores us to “mingle our voices with those bright, shining seraphs around” God’s throne, “with acclamations of praise, singing Hosanna to God and the Lamb” (v. 79). The First Presidency’s preface to the 1985 hymn book conveys similar sentiment.

Elder Oaks instructed in the October General Conference of 1994 that hymn singing harmonizes us with the Spirit, is one of the best ways to learn Church doctrine, and that because “Sacred music has a unique capacity to communicate our feelings of love for the Lord,” it is a glorious form of worship (Ensign, November, 1994, p.10). I love hearing the repetition of hymns with different voices. Those of you who conduct the music, play the organ or piano, and sing press the contours of your difference to what might otherwise be the torture of sameness. I love to hear the distinctive and differentiating voices of some of you that emerge and then vanish. The great (or not so great) throng of less spectacular voices are beautiful as they strive for at-one-ment with the Lord. And whoever selects the hymns contributes to our communion with the Lord as well. The comparison and contrast of the hymns with the speakers and their messages, as well as their intertextual relation, sustains even when prosaic sermons fail.

The Gospel accounts of the Word’s atoning sacrifice reflect a great many different emotions, from staccato pleas for it to end if it is the Father’s will, to whole note silences before Pilate and those who mocked, from Luke’s swelling account of his wanting forgiveness for his tormentors, to John’s mentioning that he was asked to care for the Lord’s mother (John 19: 25-27), from his desperate final questioning in Mark and Matthew “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15: 34), to the more confident conclusion in Luke, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23: 46). That there are differences alongside sameness in the accounts affirms the difficulties of reconciling script, voice, and the limits of mortal perspective as even the authors of the Gospels likened the scriptures to themselves (1 Ne. 19: 23). That the Lord communes with us in our differences, that he circumscribes our truths into a great whole, I am certain. That we similarly value differences as we commune with the Word in his Church is my hope and testimony, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Excerpted from presentation: The first 14 verses of John, sometimes called the prologue of John, are some of the most controversial in the New Testament. I’ve examined various translations of John 1: 1 and some have differences with profound doctrinal implications. That John engages in polemic on behalf of fellow believers is clear, and his gospel differs substantially from Matthew’s emphasis on Jesus’ Jewishness and interactions with Jewish law, from Mark’s focus on Jesus’ doings and his emotiveness (Mark cares not about how or under what circumstances Jesus was born), and from Luke’s poetic description of Jesus as detached and otherworldly (the rare exceptions, such as Luke 22: 43-44, are suspected to be later scribal additions to refute the Docetists). That Jesus is the “Logos,” or the Word, referenced in the passage is a crucial point of agreement for John is asserting Jesus’ pre-mortal existence and association with his Father. The idea of Jesus as the Word in John 1: 1…



Excerpted from presentation: One of the major scuffles in historic Christianity has been the spoken vs. the written word, with one central conflict being that of the Protestant’s rejection of the authoritative orality of the Catholic priesthood in the face of its illiterate supplicants in favor of the exclusive authority and liberating literacy of the bible itself, the concept known as sola scriptura (The complimentary concept to Martin Luther’s famous priesthood of all believers doctrine). Mormon’s edited volume indicates a similar situation vexed the scripture-keeping Nephites and the apparently more oral Lamanites (at least insofar as keeping the BOM record is concerned). Clement of Alexandria, a second century Christian intellectual, contributed to a form of this argument that prefigured that of the Protestant reformation by 1300 years. He wrote, rather ironically:

The living voice was the best medium for the communication of Christian truth. Writings were public and it was wrong to cast pearls before swine. To write implied that one was inspired by the Holy Spirit and this was a presumptuous claim. If one must write, it were better that one should write badly. The heretics had shown that a clever style should mislead and corrupt.

That such thinking, by extension, justifies not only errant copies of apostolic writings but also Tennis Shoes among the Nephites, mixes absurdity with piety. Scripture, in this vein, is matter barely organized…

Replacement of the last sentence of the paragraph in presented version: The First Presidency’s preface to the 1985 hymn book says:
Inspirational music is an essential part of our church meetings. The hymns invite the Spirit of the Lord, create a feeling of reverence, unify us as members, and provide a way for us to offer praises to the Lord. Some of the greatest sermons are preached by the singing of hymns. Hymns move us to repentance and good works, build testimony and faith, comfort the weary, console the mourning, and inspire us to endure to the end (Hymns, 1985, p. ix).

[SteelBlue]

Excellent work EQ. Besides that great intro, I particularly enjoyed these two passages:

1) "But it is also in the words the priests’ speak. For while they may strive for sameness in their recitation there is always difference: They pronounce some words more clearly than others, speed up and slow down, pause for emphasis or to swallow, crack their voices, breathe, sigh, and clear their throats in the microphone. Their voices can be low or high, and sometimes during the same prayer! I love listening to their voices and to the way their speech draws me to think about one part of the Gospel and then another. They’re most always the best two talks in sacrament meeting. God hears the words of their mouths and we should too."

2)"Those of you who conduct the music, play the organ or piano, and sing press the contours of your difference to what might otherwise be the torture of sameness. I love to hear the distinctive and differentiating voices of some of you that emerge and then vanish. The great (or not so great) throng of less spectacular voices are beautiful as they strive for at-one-ment with the Lord. And whoever selects the hymns contributes to our communion with the Lord as well. The comparison and contrast of the hymns with the speakers and their messages, as well as their intertextual relation, sustains even when prosaic sermons fail."

That's some beautiful writing and you made me think about some things that I've honestly never thought about. Very well done.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

Excellent work EQ. Besides that great intro, I particularly enjoyed these two passages:

1) "But it is also in the words the priests’ speak. For while they may strive for sameness in their recitation there is always difference: They pronounce some words more clearly than others, speed up and slow down, pause for emphasis or to swallow, crack their voices, breathe, sigh, and clear their throats in the microphone. Their voices can be low or high, and sometimes during the same prayer! I love listening to their voices and to the way their speech draws me to think about one part of the Gospel and then another. They’re most always the best two talks in sacrament meeting. God hears the words of their mouths and we should too."

2)"Those of you who conduct the music, play the organ or piano, and sing press the contours of your difference to what might otherwise be the torture of sameness. I love to hear the distinctive and differentiating voices of some of you that emerge and then vanish. The great (or not so great) throng of less spectacular voices are beautiful as they strive for at-one-ment with the Lord. And whoever selects the hymns contributes to our communion with the Lord as well. The comparison and contrast of the hymns with the speakers and their messages, as well as their intertextual relation, sustains even when prosaic sermons fail."

That's some beautiful writing and you made me think about some things that I've honestly never thought about. Very well done.

I'm very glad you got something positive from it. When the speakers are ill-prepared, dull, think that pulling the first five quotes from their LDS database will do it, are endlessly quoting some story from Chicken Soup for the Soul, or are otherwise indulging in the repetition of sameness, I can still enjoy the sacrament and the music. In fact, I sing with extra gusto on those days!

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I'm very glad you got something positive from it. When the speakers are ill-prepared, dull, think that pulling the first five quotes from their LDS database will do it, are endlessly quoting some story from Chicken Soup for the Soul, or are otherwise indulging in the repetition of sameness, I can still enjoy the sacrament and the music. In fact, I sing with extra gusto on those days!

I too saw some things not previously recognized.

Enjoyed the talks!