Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

I will admit, at the outset, that I am not someone who gets a lot out of physical ritual. I don't feel more spiritual when I'm praying standing or sitting or kneeling or lying down or with my arms folded or hands clasped or holding hands in a group. So I may be discounting something that actually makes a big (or at least noticeable) difference for most people.

However, this:

Plain Jane wrote:I've always been taught that to pray in a group setting, you must stand in front of the group. . . . I understand the disabled and even the elderly . . . avoiding having to stand up, but we younger folks have no excuse. I feel like it is informal and less respectful.

strikes me as reading a lot into very little.

In sacrament meeting or at a fireside, you're in front of a big group and you generally need a microphone to be heard. So, you have to go to the front of the room, where the microphone is, anyway, plus, it takes a long time for a large group to shift gears, so it's nice to have that standing up and walking time as a preparatory signal.

Primary, on the other hand, tends to be naturally more free-form because of the age of the children involved. But part of the point of Primary is to teach children about good behavior in church, plus, little children respond well to physical ritual and activity as a learning tool. So standing up to pray in Primary is part of signaling to the group that it's time to pray, and the act of standing up, walking up to the front, and stepping up on the little stool (if necessary) are a helpful ritual for little children who are learning to pray in front of a group.

However, YW/YM/RS/EQ or Sunday School don't fit either of these extremes, so it may simply be more efficient for the person praying to stand in place. (Although, again, standing helps to signal to the smaller group that we're going to shift our attention and activity.)

Also, I was never taught

"On your knees or on your feet, but never ever in your seat."

(On the contrary, I was taught "Pray always" and

Cry unto him when ye are in your fields, yea, over all your flocks. Cry unto him in your houses, yea, over all your household, both morning, mid-day, and evening.

which rather seems to supersede the little Primary rhyme.)

As I hope I've indicated, I have nothing but respect for people who prefer to pray while kneeling vs. standing vs. sitting, but the trouble with codifying "a good idea, in some circumstances" into "the ONLY RIGHT WAY to do it" is that people like Plain Jane end up freaking out over little things and missing the bigger picture.

Man, people get nitpicky about the weirdest things sometimes...

I always figured it was just so everyone could hear you better. When you stand up, your voice travels better...and when you turn to face everyone else, it becomes even easier for them to hear you. Just like how teachers are always at the front facing the class, speakers are always at the front facing the congregation, baptisms are always at the front so everyone can see. It's just logical. But what if it's really hard for someone to get out of their seat because they'll have to step over 18 people? It's more logical for them to stay where they are.

I don't think I've ever been taught that standing is more respectful. It may have been implied in all those years of Primary, but no one ever came out and said that this is what you should do for this reason, blah blah blah. And I highly, highly doubt that there are any scriptures or conference talks devoted to the topic of standing vs. sitting while praying. So for me, it becomes a moot point.

I do think it's interesting, though, that people tend to suddenly sit up a lot straighter when someone is about to pray. I don't know if that's related to respect or just a shift in the meeting, but it happens quite often in the wards I attend.

I probably should have clarified that I don't necessarily think what I was taught is the only or best way to pray. After all, prayer is kind of a very personal thing.

mic0 wrote:I probably should have clarified that I don't necessarily think what I was taught is the only or best way to pray. After all, prayer is kind of a very personal thing.

No, I got that from your response. (And from what I know of you, generally.) But it's another weird thing that some people grow up with and some people don't.

I'm pretty sure I was taught that with a larger group, you really should stand and be in the front of the room because THAT WAS THE RULE. Like, the bishop stood up and mentioned that specifically... though I can't remember any of the reasons that may have been attributed to it.

But with a smaller groups (like, 3-10 people), I don't see the need.

Personally, I've always been taught that prayer is best when done on top of the Rameumptom.

There is an underlying principle to this entire discussion that is important. But it's important to understand the underlying principle, not how that principle can manifest itself based on cultural circumstances.

The underlying principle is that when we pray we ought to be respectful and loving toward our Heavenly Father. My parents taught me to get out of bed when I pray at night because it would help demonstrate those two issues since I wouldn't be putting the prayer before what I deemed most comfortable. However, in some other time in the future, or maybe on some other planet, the bed might be considered the holiest place and children would be encouraged to pray in their bed so that they would demonstrate that love and respect.

The original reader has mistaken the the practical advice given to help demonstrate the underlying principle, for the actual principle itself.

Also, Marduk, my Rameumptom is bigger than yours so nyah!

Marduk wrote:Personally, I've always been taught that prayer is best when done on top of the Rameumptom.

HA. Love this.

ahem. wrote:I'm pretty sure I was taught that with a larger group, you really should stand and be in the front of the room because THAT WAS THE RULE. Like, the bishop stood up and mentioned that specifically... though I can't remember any of the reasons that may have been attributed to it.

Heh, when I worked in the Religion department, I had a teacher challenge me to find written documentation of the direction to have arms folded during a prayer. It was his assertion that the practice stemmed from learning prayer as a small child and needing some direction to keep small hands from mischief.

Tao wrote:

ahem. wrote:I'm pretty sure I was taught that with a larger group, you really should stand and be in the front of the room because THAT WAS THE RULE. Like, the bishop stood up and mentioned that specifically... though I can't remember any of the reasons that may have been attributed to it.

Heh, when I worked in the Religion department, I had a teacher challenge me to find written documentation of the direction to have arms folded during a prayer. It was his assertion that the practice stemmed from learning prayer as a small child and needing some direction to keep small hands from mischief.

Yeah, but I don't feel like there is some big conspiracy. Physical ritual is part of achieving the proper state of mind and reminding ourselves about what we are doing. And if that means folding my arms, or standing in front of a room when I pray for a group, I have no problem with it.

As long as we recognize that these are useful rituals, but not necessary ones.

ahem. wrote:I'm pretty sure I was taught that with a larger group, you really should stand and be in the front of the room because THAT WAS THE RULE. Like, the bishop stood up and mentioned that specifically... though I can't remember any of the reasons that may have been attributed to it. . . .

As long as we recognize that these are useful rituals, but not necessary ones.

So, how did you come to the conclusion that standing in front of the group was "useful but not necessary" since you were taught otherwise? (I.e., why do you think the original question-asker is freaking out about the situation, but you're not?)

Also, I feel like the creep from "good idea" to "doctrine" is part of what makes people confuse "feeling the Spirit" with "being in a situation that's comfortable and familiar." (I.e., someone who can't feel the Spirit at a non-LDS service because they're too freaked out at the differences between the two to appreciate anything that the non-LDS service has to offer.)

Katya wrote:(I.e., someone who can't feel the Spirit at a non-LDS service because they're too freaked out at the differences between the two to appreciate anything that the non-LDS service has to offer.)

This perfectly describes the way I used to feel about alternate translations of the Bible. I have since learned...

Katya wrote:

ahem. wrote:I'm pretty sure I was taught that with a larger group, you really should stand and be in the front of the room because THAT WAS THE RULE. Like, the bishop stood up and mentioned that specifically... though I can't remember any of the reasons that may have been attributed to it. . . .

As long as we recognize that these are useful rituals, but not necessary ones.

So, how did you come to the conclusion that standing in front of the group was "useful but not necessary" since you were taught otherwise? (I.e., why do you think the original question-asker is freaking out about the situation, but you're not?)

Ah, I see what you're saying. The thing is, I do kind of agree with the original question-asker. If I'm in a big group and somebody just stands where they are (instead of making the effort to move to the front), there is a moment or two where I am slightly irked. I just tend to think they either don't know the rule, or have a good reason for not complying with it.

What I meant by "useful but not necessary" was that I have come to understand that rule as a non-essential part of our religious culture. Like wearing a white shirt to pass the sacrament: certainly preferred (because of symbolism, respect, etc.), but I can imagine circumstances (cultural differences, unavailability, etc.) where a white shirt would be a non-essential part of an otherwise essential practice.

There are good reasons for standing in front of a group when we pray, and we should comply with it when possible. But it will not effect our eternal salvation in the end. And there's no real reason to make assumptions about others when they do not comply with it because (a) they might have good reasons for not complying and (b) it's not our place to judge or correct them unless we are in a position of stewardship/leadership over them.

ahem. wrote:

Katya wrote:

ahem. wrote:I'm pretty sure I was taught that with a larger group, you really should stand and be in the front of the room because THAT WAS THE RULE. Like, the bishop stood up and mentioned that specifically... though I can't remember any of the reasons that may have been attributed to it. . . .

As long as we recognize that these are useful rituals, but not necessary ones.

So, how did you come to the conclusion that standing in front of the group was "useful but not necessary" since you were taught otherwise? (I.e., why do you think the original question-asker is freaking out about the situation, but you're not?)

Ah, I see what you're saying. The thing is, I do kind of agree with the original question-asker. If I'm in a big group and somebody just stands where they are (instead of making the effort to move to the front), there is a moment or two where I am slightly irked. I just tend to think they either don't know the rule, or have a good reason for not complying with it.

What I meant by "useful but not necessary" was that I have come to understand that rule as a non-essential part of our religious culture. Like wearing a white shirt to pass the sacrament: certainly preferred (because of symbolism, respect, etc.), but I can imagine circumstances (cultural differences, unavailability, etc.) where a white shirt would be a non-essential part of an otherwise essential practice.

There are good reasons for standing in front of a group when we pray, and we should comply with it when possible. But it will not effect our eternal salvation in the end. And there's no real reason to make assumptions about others when they do not comply with it because (a) they might have good reasons for not complying and (b) it's not our place to judge or correct them unless we are in a position of stewardship/leadership over them.

So, what makes something a (global) rule as opposed to a useful idea?

Um, I guess it's a rule if somebody I respect tells me it is. I'm not sure that I've ever really thought much on the difference.

What do you guys think?

Culture vs. policy vs. doctrine...

Culture = common but not stated in any church materials
Policy = stated in church materials
Doctrine = the most debatable thing ever