Comments on: No Time for Boredom

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Thu, 28 May 2009 01:09:16 +0000

Yup. I think we’re agreed. If you imagine this program implemented in a ward today, it raises quite a different reaction than when you think about its being implemented in a hundred small, rural Western communities of 1935-36 where virtually all of the fun was home-made, and the making of it was part of the fun. Even in a city like Salt Lake with more variety and opportunities this must have been welcome entertainment.

My mother turned 14 at the beginning of this MIA year. In her stories of her youth, ward activities were prominent and fondly remembered.

By: queuno

queuno — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:45:10 +0000

Eric B stole my answer, word for word, in his first sentence.

We should keep in mind that this was a different era, when the ward was the center of one’s social life. We’ve moved on from that, both in terms of focus and in terms of Church funding. I think that things like the opera have been replaced by other community capabilities such that the Church doesn’t need to provide it.

By: Steve C.

Steve C. — Wed, 27 May 2009 15:00:45 +0000

This raises a question about BALANCE. To be honest I know people who believe that the Church should provide everything in their daily lives including entertainment. On the other hand, in my unit we are lean on activities and feel that we need to have more socials. As I said, it’s about striking the right balance.

By: Researcher

Researcher — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:18:32 +0000

Ahh…the days before television.

By: Eric Boysen

Eric Boysen — Wed, 27 May 2009 12:42:28 +0000

Fun, yes, but exhausting!

I look at this schedule and think of this on top of three separate Sunday meetings, mid-week fast and testimony meetings, additional quorum and auxilliary meetings, presidency meetings, home and visiting teaching and I wonder how anyone could survive before consolidated schedules and corelation. How did the church manage to have a reputation for its work ethic?