specific song not to be sung in regular mtg?

[mkmurray]

What is referred to is not the hymn, but an arrangement of it known as the 'Hosanna Anthem'.

To make it more readily available for events such as temple dedications, it was put in 'The Choirbook' in 1980 and which is probably still in print today, it is the last item in that book. There is a note at the bottom of the first page of the arrangement indicating that this arrangement should be reserved for special occasions such as temple dedications.

It also tells how the parts not specifically tied to dedications can be used by taking those specifically for dedications out, and where they are. In fact, in 1999 we dedicated a stake center, and the person who did the music had one of our organists arrange it so that the just the introductory 'Hosannnas' and the final two verses as you see them were sung, and instead of the parts typically reserved for the dedications the first two verses of the hymn from the hymnbook were sung, and the last two were sung with the five-part arrangement seen in the Choirbook.

This sounds like the most likely explanation of the confusion.

[ChristineHannan]

There seems to be some confusion regarding a directive given about the use of Hymn #2, The Spirit of God. I have raised the matter myself on several occasions when the Hymn has been sung, because I knew it was not correct procedure. The directive was given in the form of a letter. I have seen this letter twice because of former callings, however there seems to be little rememberance of it. My husband has been a Bishop and is currently in our Stake Presidency. He does not have a copy of the letter but is very much aware of it. Over the recent (2010) Christmas/New Year break, my husband and I attended the YSA Convention in Sydney, Australia. At the closing Ceremony (2011), the Closing Hymn was announced by the YSA Leader conducting as Hymn #2, The Spirit of God. Immediately, Elder Vincent, an Area Authority Seventy, who was Presiding, stood up and told the YSA leader conducting to change the Hymn - which was done. The matter is not that the directive hasn't been given, it is that people change callings and forget to pass information on and also simply that people forget. I think a study of the words to the Hymn helps us to understand why the Hymn should be kept for special occasions - it is not at every meeting that "the spirit of God like a fire is burning" and repetitive singing would take away from it's significance.

[rmrichesjr]

At the risk of continuing a discussion regarding policy and procedure...

I found it an interesting coincidence that my ward sang hymn #2 today as a rest hymn during sacrament meeting. I trust that my bishop has probably done a pretty good job of studying the new/current handbook, and that if such a directive were currently in force, he would have had the hymn changed. Earlier in the thread, there are multiple references with fairly strong indications that no such directive is currently applicable. A change of hymn under the direction of the presiding officer at one particular meeting does not necessarily imply a Church-wide ban against said hymn in all meetings. Even if there had at one time been such a directive regarding hymn #2, sometimes, policies and procedures change, and not all policies that have become obsolete are specifically listed as such in subsequent instructions. I believe the standard answer regarding such questions is for the individual who has concerns to consult their local priesthood leaders, who should be able to find the current instructions from Church headquarters.

[jbh001]

While that it interesting information, the scenario you describe is the presiding authority at a meeting (area authority seventy in this case) changing the planned meeting. The presiding authority is within his authority to do such. His actions and directives do not necessarily imply a more general Church policy, only local discretion and preference.

I haven't found any prohibition to singing the hymn "The Spirit of God" in Church meetings listed in the newly revised Handbook 2. The only reference to singing restrictions on "The Spirit of God" are printed in regards to the "Hosanna Anthem" printed in The Choirbook as discussed in the posts above.

[gregwanderson]

Uh oh. My can of worms just cracked open. If you ask me (and I realize you didn't) the church has micromanaged music more than necessary. As a result, many members are too sensitive about music and it can lead to "finding fault one with another" instead of more constructive things.

There may have been a time when, for example, the use of a guitar in sacrament meeting was expressly prohibited. But now it's allowed. At any rate, there are still members who will squirm in their seats if they see someone playing a guitar in the meeting. So, no matter how appropriate the music may be, the individual who is worried about a "policy" will have a difficult time feeling the spirit during that song. When someone recently used a trumpet in my friend's ward they spent most of the rest of that Sunday doing damage control. They felt the need to assure everyone else in the ward that, contrary to what they might have thought, it really was okay to use a trumpet in sacrament meeting (and they had checked the new handbook beforehand).

Perhaps a historian can track old policies but, as stated previously, the church doesn't normally go out of it's way to list expired policies. So if you can't find the "smoking gun" letter from HQ then I'd say it's time to stop perpetuating what may be, at best, an outdated policy... before it transforms into a foolish tradition. As President Monson recently told us, there is safety on the handbooks.

Ironically, the opening hymn today in my ward's sacrament meeting was, indeed, Hymn 2.

[russellhltn]

There may have been a time when, for example, the use of a guitar in sacrament meeting was expressly prohibited. But now it's allowed. [...]When someone recently used a trumpet in my friend's ward they spent most of the rest of that Sunday doing damage control. They felt the need to assure everyone else in the ward that, contrary to what they might have thought, it really was okay to use a trumpet in sacrament meeting (and they had checked the new handbook beforehand).

I do remember there was language in the past that specifically mentioned guitars.

Handbook 2, 14.4.2: "Organs and pianos, or their electronic equivalents, are the standard instruments used in Church meetings. If other instruments are used, their use should be in keeping with the spirit of the meeting. Instruments with a prominent or less worshipful sound, such as most brass and percussion, are not appropriate for sacrament meeting."

So it appears that while guitars are not expressly prohibited, they are not encouraged. But on the issue of a trumpet, the guidance seems quite clear to me.

But getting back to the topic, unless someone can reference said letter and show that it's still "in force", I'd question claims that it's not appropriate for ward meetings.

[nutterb]

Handbook 2, 14.4.2: "Organs and pianos, or their electronic equivalents, are the standard instruments used in Church meetings. If other instruments are used, their use should be in keeping with the spirit of the meeting. Instruments with a prominent or less worshipful sound, such as most brass and percussion, are not appropriate for sacrament meeting."

So it appears that while guitars are not expressly prohibited, they are not encouraged. But on the issue of a trumpet, the guidance seems quite clear to me.

But what if the trumpet is made out of nickel?

[BellMR]

While I no nothing of the Church policy in this matter, I will say that Elder Bednar would not allow "The Spirit of God" to be sung in meetings at Ricks/BYU-I while he was president there. I was actually in a meeting (long explanation left out) where the audience began singing that song and he stopped it two lines in.

[gregwanderson]

The logical possibilities are: A) Something was a wrong with the song, B) Something was wrong with the situation or C) Something was a wrong with President Bednar. Was there no explanation at that very moment? If not, then we, as Latter-day Saints who are programmed to be a little too critical when it comes to "appropriate music," might invent a lot of misguided reasons.

I would say that we can't prove "A" and the fact that President Bednar became an apostle puts doubt on "C." So I will go with "B."

[Mikerowaved]

I would like to thank those who expressed their views and opinions on this subject, but it is time to close the discussion before it drifts into areas we don't want to go.

Mike
Community Moderator