Talk:Sacrament (LDS Church)
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sacrament (LDS Church) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
The way this is worded makes it sound like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints use of water is an exception, but this seems misleading since they dwarf all other LDS denominations in size. Its accurate, but the COFCOLDS is the only Restorationist sect most people have heard of (maybe the Community of Christ. To say "most denominations use grape juice except, well, those guys in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints" when thats who most people know/care about. I would say it should read something like "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the largest Mormon denomination, uses water, but most of the smaller groups in the movement use grape juice". Or wine, if they do, but do any Mormons use wine? Carolynparrishfan 16:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- From a historical and doctrinal perspective, I'm not sure I can agree in good conscience. From 1830-1912, the church did administer wine (some congregations as late as 1922). That is about half of the LDS church's history. In addition, of the 20 million or so adherents to the Latter Day Saint movement, about 13 million (a little over half) only use water today (the LDS Church). The rest predominently use "wine" of some sort. So your point may be true TODAY, but it wasn't a hundred years ago for sure. And the revelations don't state water, they state wine. Historically and culturaly, water is an exception to the rule. In addition, this article is about the sacrament within the Mormonism movement, so the reading has to be broad enough to cover all sects in the movement. If you'd like to create a specific section in the article about the sacrament in the LDS church, go for it. The article is in much need of a clean-up anyway. Just try to keep the LDS/Mormonism distinction clear. -Visorstuff 17:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- The number is an estimation of all LDSM sect members PLUS cultural mormons and those who have left mormonism, but were a part of it at one time. 13 million LDS, 3 million of other Latter Day demoninations and about 3 million cultural mormons, born mormons, or exmormons (about a million a piece) For example, those who go inactive and their children never get baptized, but were blessed they would be included in the estimation. Those of other denominations who've left the movement would be included in this list. As the COC has decreased significantly in the past 20 years, this would account for them. I can break down farther if you want? But does this help? -Visorstuff 22:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
I certainly don'w want to belittle the other denoms in the LDS movement. And I don't claim to be knowledgeable about Mormonism. And I did mean in a contemporary context--historicaly of course your right it is an exception. Carolynparrishfan 19:08, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think you were belittlign other denoms in the broader movement at all. I think you have a good point that the article needs to address. If you can take a stab at a specific section in the article about the sacrament in the LDS church, i think that would be great. I just wanted to provide the context on the distinction. Will you edit? -Visorstuff 22:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
I recall, but cannot confirm that the use of leavened bread as opposed to unleavened (use of yeast) is symbolic of christ having risen. I.e. prior to the ressurection, at the last supper, they used unleavened bread, but now it is proper to use leavened (risen) bread. Is there any validity to this? Also, given the article about using any food including potatoes, it seems to me that this may not be the case. Bytebear 04:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- There are hundreds if not thousands of symbols - God teaches in symbols, but the church does not elaborate on such, except in generalities - the bread represents the body, the water the blood of Christ. leavened or unleavened, it is up to the adherent to see teh symbols and receive the revelation tehy need during the ordinance. -Visorstuff (talk) 04:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Arm to the Square
Can anyone provide a reference for the claim that priests brought their right arm to the square when blessing the bread or water until the 1980s? I recall seeing a photo somewhere in which an older man was doing so, but can't remember where I saw it and Google isn't being very helpful.
- I've seen a photo of a high Priest holding both arms to the square during Sacrament. I think the Manti TLC group had it on their web site. --Tobey (talk) 04:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- I have an LDS Church priesthood manual that was published in 1978, and in the back there are instructions on how to perform certain ordinances. For the sacrament ordinance, it says nothing about raising the arm to the square, so the date of "until the 1980s" at least is probably wrong, though I don't doubt it was done at some point in the past. Snocrates 04:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
This is another example of us re-interpreting the past through modern glasses where we see a picture and don't understand the context. Quite simply, the assertion is incorrect. In the past, many Church members followed the instructions given to the school of the prophets and would pray "with uplifted hands" when saying any prayer, but like many things in regard to the sacrament, such as putting an arm behind your back, or kneeling on one knee, or standing facing the front, or a hundred other items that today we'd call false traditions. To my understanding the 1980 date you reference was one of the more recent clarifications that some of these tradtions should not be practiced, however, the first statement suggesting that it be not practiced was way back when wine was still used for the sacrament rather than water, which was disconintued in 1912. Incidentally, the photo is in the Church historical museum in SLC, and has been re-used in Church manuals in the past.
A good place to read about praying with uplifted hands is in Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman. He addresses praying with uplifted hands - and how many saw that as a sign as of the true church at the time. -Visorstuff (talk) 04:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- If the "you" you refer to is me, allow me to clarify that I did not make the claim; I was just curious if someone (preferably the originator) could back it up with a reference.
- I'm not sure that I was re-interpreting anything, although that darn hermeneutic circle is so hard not to get sucked into. :}
- In the photo (which I mentioned only as a possible starting point to determining the validity of the claim, not as evidence of it) there was a man sitting at a sacrament table with his right arm to the square, not both arms uplifted.
- I see, however, that under the heading of "Changes in sacrament administration," reference to these "incorrect" traditions have been removed altogether. Is it for lack of a citation or pertinence? Cheers, --Rojerts 19:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a very confusing article. It is titled "Sacrament (LDS Church)", yet refers to other denominations in the LDS movement. Either the name of the article needs to be changed, or this article needs to be edited so that it solely refers to sacrament in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Kristmace (talk) 18:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- Good catch; I deleted the material for other denominations, but the article still needs work. Thanks. --StormRider 02:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Use of the word "Mormon" in this article
I'm starting this topic to discuss the use of the word "Mormon" in this article in reference to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As a Church member myself, I can tell you that our leaders have asked that the use of the word "Mormon" in the public domain be confined only to the "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" and in similar contexts, and that the terms Latter-day Saints, LDS, or simply "Church members" be employed in the public domain when referring to members of the Church. Since such a request has been so respectfully given, I feel that we ought to honor that. While I recognize that Church policy doesn't dictate WP policy, setting aside my membership in the Church for a moment, just as a WP editor who knows of this request by the Church, I would like to suggest its immediate implementation in this article. Thoughts? --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- J, this is a good opportunity to step forward in boldness and make the changes. I personally prefer the term "LDS" more than Church member, but I don't think that will cause a problem. What is certain is my lack of enthusiasm for the term Mormon, which is seldom the best term. Cheers. --StormRider 22:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- Storm Rider, I appreciate your comment. Ever since joining WP, I have tried using both the methods of "be bold" and "discuss first." I have found that what works in one situation may not work in another, so after weighing the effects of being bold against the possibly irate actions of disagreeing colleagues here at WP, I decided in this case to discuss first. I see you have implemented the changes I suggested. Thank you. Maybe next time I will just "be bold," but I felt it wiser in this case to discuss first. I'm glad I did. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 02:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
- When I am reviewing a proposed edit my first question to answer is if it is controversial. In this case, the ability of another editor to complain is very slim because the Church has stated a preference. Where problems arise in this specific area are when editors confuse a LDS with Latter Day Saint or with a member of the Latter Day Saint movement. LDS tend to confuse the appropriate time to use the proper appellation.
- I also think each of the LDS topic-related articles should be reviewed for the correction you noted here. In addition, corrections to LDS church, to be correct it is LDS Church with a capital "C". Further, when referring to the Church, it should always be capitalized. This was discussed some time ago and the decision was to use no caps, but that has changed based upon the outcome of the same type of conversation at the Catholic Church article. Cheers. --StormRider 16:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'll keep that in mind. Thank you. I'll keep an eye out to correct this in other articles as I run across it, and I will do it without discussion. One additional note. I understand the use of LDSs vs. LDS as far as WP purposes go, but mightn't it make more grammatical sense to make it simply LDS? That way, when spelled out, it would be Latter-day Saints rather than Latter-day Saintss. Just a thought. Clear as mud? --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 03:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Blessing for the bread -- "has" versus "hath"
I've changed the wording in the article to "has" and the footnote to "hath". The wording in the Doctrine and Covenants is the more recent wording the Church has been directed to use. I figured I should mention it here in case anyone wants to discuss it. Kcowolf (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Kneeling during Sacrament prayers
I've changed the following:
- Until the late 1890s or early 20th century, the entire congregation generally knelt during the sacramental prayers. Modern practice, against 2 scriptural witnesses, D&C 20:76  and Moroni 4:2 , and with no further revelatory scripture, is that only the individual giving the prayer kneels while congregants remain seated.
Regarding the reference to Moroni 4:2, Moroni 4 is describing ancient practice, while D&C 20 is direction about how it is to be performed in modern times, so it doesn't seem right to say that the church is acting "against" Moroni 4. It could similarly be said that the church is acting "against" 3 Nephi 11:25 by not using that wording in the baptismal ordinance, however the wording the church uses follows the commandment given in D&C 20:73.
Regarding the reference to D&C 20:76, I agree that there is "no further revelatory scripture" (emphasis mine) -- that is, nothing has been added to the Standard Works -- saying that the congregation doesn't need to kneel during the prayers. However, the newest version of Handbooks 1 and 2 was stated to be "the most current interpretations and procedural directions of the Church’s highest authorities", and the church leaders claim inspiration while writing and approving it.
I wasn't able to find anything on the church website stating when or how the practice changed. More research into that might indicate how or to what extent revelation was involved in the decison, even if it didn't result in "new scripture". Kcowolf (talk) 03:22, 11 March 2013 (UTC)