The wards who use our building take turns cleaning the building. Since there are three wards, each ward cleans it one month a quarter. Generally, they clean it weekly during that month. In our ward, we alternate quarters between the elders quorum and the high priests. This month was the elders quorum’s turn in our ward.
My family was one of the families cleaning tonight. While I was vacuuming the chapel for 40 minutes, I was left wondering why people leave the chapel in such a mess? Each week at that. Ground in Triscuits, ground in Ritz crackers, squished raisins, ground in Cheerios, and on. Why can’t people leave the garbage at home or at least clean up after themselves? Why can’t they take they bulletins with them when they leave? Why can’t they put away the hymnals when they leave?
Are other churches (faiths) like this?
I used to be the PFA for the agent Bishop in a 4 ward building that also housed the stake offices, large genelogy, institute wing and one of the wards was a singles ward. Lots of people and lots of activity each week.
I also was responsibile for prepping the building on Saturdays. I would have 4 to 6 families spend about 2 hours every Saturday getting the building ready for Sunday.
I also arrived at the building early on Sunday and spent 30 minutes prepping the chapel for our ward. Then another 30 minutes prepping it for the next ward. I tied to have all the PFA’s doing the same thing for their wards.
In addition to this we had a cleaning crew that went through the building every week and a cleaning woman 4 hours twice a week.
I remember one Saturday where we had just finsihed putting the cleaning supplies away and these kids came in the door and threw little pieces of candy on the carpet as they ran into the gym.
The real problem I think it that members do not respect the chapel. I have seen (mostly women) taking water bottles and food to eat and drink during the service. Then leave their mess for others to clean up after them. The families that would sit in the overflow between the chapel and the gym were by far the worst offenders.
Sometimes the food between meetings was so bad, I would have to get the vacuums out and vacuum the chapel before the next meeting would start.
I guess eating and drinking in the chapel is right there with wearing cheap flip flops for Sunday wear.
Our building is exactly the same although it is the same faith as yours. And the sad part of it is, those cleaning it are not the ones that are making the messes. They just come to church expecting the chapel/building to be clean. Our building too is cleaned on Saturday mornings but if there is an activity that night then it’s usually left in a mess.
Last Sunday it took 3 of us one and a half hours Sunday morning to clean out the PM rooms so we could actualy set it up. There were toys in all the classrooms, food, paper dishes, juice boxes on their side dripping/spilt, enough to fill half a black garbage bag. The carpets had not been vaccuumed. When I complained to our building manager and showed him the mess he said the building HAD been cleaned the morning before as he had been there cleaning it. I don’t know what the answer is Kim but I sure would want to hear if anyone here would have some suggestions that worked for them.
As for you George, I am one of those women who brings a water bottle to church and I end up having to fill it 3-4 times in the 3 hour period so yes I bring it into the chapel with me. But I also bring it home I don’t leave it behind. I have never seen women eat cheerios or granola bars or snacks. Children yes women no.
As mum said. It isn’t the women eating the snacks and if they are there is a very good reason. It is the children.
We don’t bring snacks for our children, and we teach them to clean up after themselves, as we also do.
I don’t know if it’s lack of respect. Sometimes people forget themselves. They may slide a bulletin in with the hymnals and not see it, forgetting it when they get ready to leave. Other times a child takes a Cheerio, drops it and it rolls about 50 feet to the front row. Someone stands on it…what do you do? You have a crushed mess and the only way you can clean it up is by vacuuming (I don’t think we should be doing that on Sunday between meetings).
Stuff happens. It’s part of life. Frankly, I’ll put up with food for the kids in the chapel, as opposed to the alternative.
“I’ll put up with food for the kids in the chapel, as opposed to the alternative.”
Having no food for the kids in the chapel?
We’ve never had food for our children in the chapel. Or at church period. Babies get to nurse at church, but that’s it in our family. We would of course reconsider if there was a health reason, such as diabetes.
When there are 75 children locked down in the chapel from 11:00 AM to 12:30 PM, I have zero expectation that all these children should not require any snacks to help them tolerate a meeting full of adult talks, hymns, and constant supervision reminding them to be reverent.
Maybe if there were puppet shows I would have greater expectations for the kids.
All I can say is, in almost 8 years of parenting, we have never had the need to bring food for our children. If children are in nursery they get a snack, but snacks are rarely allowed in primary either. When I was growing up my parents didn’t bring snacks for us either. Mymum didn’t breastfeed as long as I do, so that helps when they are younger, of course.
“When there are 75 children locked down in the chapel from 11:00 AM to 12:30 PM, I have zero expectation that all these children should not require any snacks to help them tolerate a meeting full of adult talks, hymns, and constant supervision reminding them to be reverent.”
Surely there are less messy (and more respectful) ways of helping children “tolerate” an “adult” meeting.
Well, because one person does not make the rule I noted that there are 75 kids, and not just 3 or 4 from one family.
So, no, I don’t judge a young couple because they feel the need to bring Cheerios for their 2-year old to snack on.
>Surely there are less messy (and more respectful) ways of helping children “tolerate†an “adult†meeting.
Well, one idea is to not take children to a 3-hour meeting right in the middle of lunch (assuming no snacks as Mary mentioned). I mean, what kind of a fool takes a child to a 3-hour sit down meeting in the middle of the day and without lunch or a nap?
“what kind of a fool takes a child to a 3-hour sit down meeting in the middle of the day and without lunch or a nap?”
Mormons apparently.
Or,
“what kind of a fool takes a MAN to a 3-hour sit down meeting in the middle of the day and without lunch or a nap?â€
Well said, Rick.
Kim. Are you the same Kmsiever on wikipedia.org?
I am.
My babies nap during church often. And my son used to fall asleep as well, during sacrament meeting, but that was due to boredom rather than fatigue. But really, children can go 3 hours without eating something, ONCE a week. The young ones usually don’t have to (because of nursery), however, it isn’t 3 hours if it is in the chapel, because that is only a little over an hour. So if they eat right before they go to church (mine did when we had later meetings) then they can survive until sacrament meeting is over.
I think it’s less a question of what is physically possible and more a question of what the parents/young children can come up with to minimize interruptions to the worship. To each his own, but far be it for me to decide that what I do is best for all. I just don’t see that it’s too big a deal.
Kim. What did you mean by saying that not all truth about the LDS faith could be found on the official web site? Just that there is more information to be found on the faith from other sources (seems obvious) or something more?
I don’t see where I said that, tortdog. was it in this thread?
“I just don’t see that it’s too big a deal.”
Maybe you don’t clean the chapel often enough. ;-)
Very true, nothing is a big deal unless you are the one who has to take care of it. When you can come to church and don’t think about leaving your garbage wherever it may be because “miracle of miracles” it’s gone the next week! Then yes, it’s “not a big deal”. But that’s because someone else is doing the clean up. That’s another thing we teach our children (and we were always taught) , to not leave a mess for someone else to take care of. Littering was and is a huge no-no in our family. When I was growing up too. I distinctly remember the car being stopped and back tracking for one of us children to pick up whatever it was that was dropped out of the window. I just CANNOT litter, it grates on me. I wish other people felt the same way.
While our family does not bring food into the chapel, it does not grate on me because I see it as a small matter. however, it’s a fine point that responsibility for cleanup does teach lessons.
my sons clean the builing immediately after church each sunday, and they both make a greater effort to be clean. but their criticism is targeted at other holders of the priesthood who do not help, rather than the people who make the mess.
perhaps the way to address this if it bothers you is to get those responsible to help in the maintenance.
but for me, this is such a little issue.
“perhaps the way to address this if it bothers you is to get those responsible to help in the maintenance”
This is nearly impossible to do with persons from the other two wards since we never see who does it. It’s nearly impossible in our ward since it’s like pulling teeth each week every six months to get volunteers to clean (regardless of whether they’re culprits or not).
“it does not grate on me because I see it as a small matter”
It grates on me TO litter, not that other people do it. That’s why I don’t do it. It only irks me somewhat that people don’t clean up after themselves. Again though, if you don’t do the clean up during the week, then it would seem like a little issue.
“it’s like pulling teeth each week every six months to get volunteers to clean”
So why not hire someone?
Seems like a win-win situation.
They used to. At one point, most chapels had their own custodians. As time went on (especially in southern Alberta) and custodians retired or moved, those who were left started cleaning more buildings. One can only assume the reason why there aren’t more custodians is because it’s not a very glamorous job. As the number of buildings per custodian grew, so did the amount of work expected of the members.
Mary Siever said: “Very true, nothing is a big deal unless you are the one who has to take care of it. When you can come to church and don’t think about leaving your garbage wherever it may be because “miracle of miracles†it’s gone the next week! Then yes, it’s “not a big dealâ€. But that’s because someone else is doing the clean up.”
Plus soap in the dispensers and paper towells and women items cleaned out of the containers.
The one that gets me is we have a mothers room and the diapers are left there all week long. The last ward that meets is a single ward and so they do not think about it. The third ward that meets is very rich (also leaves the most mess) and will not take the trash out after their block is finished.
Well, we do clean the buiding and I still see it as a small issue.
To each his own.
Kim. I believe the reason there are no custodians is that the Church determined that it should be the members who are responsible for the regular maintenance/cleaning of the buildings they use, rather than pay a full-time custodian. Of course, this saved the Church quite a few $$$ as well.
I agree with the policy change. Makes sense. Seems to me, however, that the first people responsible for the maintenance/cleaning is the Aaronic Priesthood. That’s been the way it has been in the last two wards that I have belonged too (with families doing some work during the week).
Kim Siever said: “They used to. At one point, most chapels had their own custodians.”
SLC did away with most custodians as a cost saving move. The custodians were put into crews and the crews go from one building to another on certain days of the week or month.
Our building is huge and we get a crew once a week and a part time custodian 8 hours a week. Her main job is to clean the Stake Presidents office, Genelogy Office, Institute and Bishops offices. The members clean everything else.
There are many Sundays were one of the wards forgets to clean and we have no toliet paper, no hand soap, no drying towels, garbage is full and FMD will not give members access to these items because the members waste them (steal is the word I keep hearing). I think perhaps “use” is a better word. Lots of people equals lots of use.
What I found works good is for each ward to take 3 or 4 months straight for the year. Then you get into a rhythm. 4 families for a large building take about 1 1/2 hours on a Saturday.
George said:”Plus soap in the dispensers and paper towells and women items cleaned out of the containers.
The one that gets me is we have a mothers room and the diapers are left there all week long. The last ward that meets is a single ward and so they do not think about it. The third ward that meets is very rich (also leaves the most mess) and will not take the trash out after their block is finished. “
We don’t have a problem with soap not in the dispensers or papertowels since it isn’t up to the general membership to keep those filled. There are specific people who take care of that (as well as cleaning toilets). As far as “women’s items” are you referring to sanitary pads and tampons? Or something else? It might help to be specific. Do you clean the women’s washroom? For the record, I have yet to be in a women’s washroom that is dirtier or smells more than a men’s washroom, in spite of feminine hygeine products.
In all the buildings I have been in the last ward has taken care of the garbage in the Mother’s Lounge. That has never been an issue.
I am not sure what the last ward that meets in your building and their financial status have to do with how clean or messy they leave the building.
My last ward was a very rich ward (almost all engineers/attorneys/doctors) and we did our share just like everyone else.
I don’t think $$$ has anything to do with one’s willingness to serve. In fact, our ward habitually had the most numbers at various service projects, including the cleanup of Slidell after Katrina.
“I don’t think $$$ has anything to do with one’s willingness to serve.”
Nor do I, but it certainly impacts one’s AVAILABILITY to serve … for better and worse.
Mary said: “are you referring to sanitary pads and tampons?”
Yes. I was trying to be polite and not write about the specfic items women use.
George
What is not being polite about mentioning sanitary napkins or tampons? Menstruation is a fact of life, there is nothing bad or wrong about it. And this could be a whole other topic, but by being hush hush about it, it makes it seem like you think there is something shameful about women having periods.
the old testament does not look on it kindly…
tortdog
You are referring to menstruation? So what if the OT doesn’t look on it kindly? And I know you are possibly being tongue in cheek, but I think it has been far too many years that women have been told (thank goodness not in recent years) that having a period is a dirty thing when in fact it is not. If you understand the reasoning of why women stayed in seclusion while on their periods in that time period you might see why it was viewed that way and how modern individuals have misintrepreted it. The problem is, it is a part of life most men aren’t comfortable with when in fact it is a testament to our fertility. If we can’t say simple things such as “sanitary pads” or “tampons” in public for fear of being “impolite” when it isn’t any more impolite than to mention “toilet paper” then we are at a very sad pass. It might help you men who are so uncomfortable with the subject to learn how amazing the female cycle is, and instead of viewing it distastefully, to gain some respect for it. I don’t mean to talk about it time after time, but to at least respect it enough to not delegate it to the realm of “disgusting”. And if this is what you teach your daughters (or at least give them the impression that a female cycle is something to be abhorred) then it’s a very sad day. Instead of getting all tied up in knots about it, get some education on the subject. Our cycles are one of the main things that make us women and by treating the female cycle as disgusting it gives the impression that women are in the same category.
Tortdog, that’s failing to differentiate between mere ritual uncleanness and actual uncleanness. Nothing in the Old Testament said women were sinful when they menstruated; it merely said they should follow certain rituals of cleanness and uncleanness that illustrate—albeit indirectly—a larger spiritual point. Like wearing white in the temple: You aren’t literally purer because you dress that way, but the color illustrates the spiritual purity we aspire to.
Thank you ltbugaf. This is it.
Mary:
>You are referring to menstruation? So what if the OT doesn’t look on it kindly?
Is what it is. Yes, it was tongue in cheek, but I think it’s far too casual to merely label the OT view as merely dealing with hygiene. In fact, the OT uses the term “unclean” and prohibits her from touching “any holy thing.”
It’s far more deep than just hygiene. The temple wasn’t set up to be a place where there weren’t any germs (or they wouldn’t be engaging in sacrifices and having people eat from the floor).
It was symbolic.
Agreed?
tortdog
And we still follow the Law of Moses to the letter?
Menstruation is not unclean or dirty and again, if you still believe so, you need some education. To continue to perpetuate that myth shows a lack of understanding and judgement. Any man who continues to see the female cycle as distasteful needs to take a good long look in the mirror. If it wasn’t for the female cycle, you wouldn’t be having babies. Again, anyone who believes mnestruation is unclean or dirty gives the impression that women are so, as well. I certainly hope you don’t have any daughters who are approaching (or have approached) puberty yet, if you have this attitude. And before they do reach this age, I would strongly advise you learn more about it before making such rash comments about it, strictly based on the Old Testament. Read the history, study the culture of the time, study the culture of it NOW. No wonder women create plays such as the Vagina Monologues. Some men are still in the dark ages.
And another thing, there is no prohibition NOW about women entering the temple and participating in sacred ordinances or work in the temple. Are you suggesting we hark back to Old Testament times? Do things the way they did? From my understanding, the law of Moses was given because the Israelites were not ready for the higher law.
Knowing the female cycle as I do, understanding the complexities of fertility and how the hormones and monthly cycle works, I have a greater reverence for what the Lord has created our bodies to do, to create children. Menstruation is a full participant of this and there is nothing that is dirty or unsavoury about it. Anything that said so in the ancient past had more to do with human failings than reality. In saying that menstruation is disgusting or “impolite” a person is then saying that the Lord created an imperfect and disgusting part of life. I don’t believe He did. I know He didn’t.
My prior comment was to the two of you (not just Mary).
>And we still follow the Law of Moses to the letter?
Nope.
>Menstruation is not unclean or dirty and again, if you still believe so, you need some education.
Why do you believe the Old Testament labeled menstruating women unclean?
(Not my words. I’m just citing to the OT.)
>Read the history, study the culture of the time, study the culture of it NOW.
I have, but obviously I missed something. How about one of you two instructing me as to why labeling a menstruating woman unclean was culturally okay back then.
>Some men are still in the dark ages.
Why is it that you continually misjudge people? I have not made the claim. All I have stated is that the Old Testament did not look on it kindly. Why try to deny that?
>there is no prohibition NOW about women entering the temple and participating in sacred ordinances or work in the temple. Are you suggesting we hark back to Old Testament times?
Nope. Did I make such a suggestion?
>From my understanding, the law of Moses was given because the Israelites were not ready for the higher law.
Waiting for your explanation on why the law was given as it was in the OT.
>Menstruation is a full participant of this and there is nothing that is dirty or unsavoury about it.
You are merely restating your position over and over again, so I’ll reask.
Why does the Old Testament make such a wrong judgment?
>Anything that said so in the ancient past had more to do with human failings than reality.
So is the OT flawed because of the men who wrote it?
>In saying that menstruation is disgusting or “impolite†a person is then saying that the Lord created an imperfect and disgusting part of life. I don’t believe He did. I know He didn’t.
Actually, I don’t think that the OT claims it is “disgusting.” However, I do believe that discussing menstruation is not polite no matter the company/circumstances. (I’d use the word inappropriate.) Personally, I wasn’t offended here, but I would not agree with a discussion of menstruation with 8-year old cub scouts. There’s a time and a place, I think that you would agree.
Further, since the Lord created women and they menstruate, why does the OT declare it to be unclean?
“Why is it that you continually misjudge people? ”
I was not necessarily referring to you. I said “some men” and I maintain that. There are men who believe mensturation is dirty and yucky and something to be avoided.
You brought up the Old Testament claim and I don’t follow that route when it comes to understanding the female cycle.
“However, I do believe that discussing menstruation is not polite no matter the company/circumstances. ”
A lot of things are not polite, but sometimes it needs to be discussed. The reason I brought it up (and I don’t apologise for it) was because George thought it was impolite to mention the words tampons or sanitary pads when they are just items that women use, and what is the big deal about saying their names? By implying that such items are “impolite” it implies that menstruation itself is impolite and thus, women are, since it is an integral part of who we are. Would he balk at mentioning toilet paper in public? It too is used for a hygeinic purpose. We wouldn’t have even HAD ths discussion if he hadn’t been prudish (and archaic) about it. And you brought yourself into the discussion by mentioning the Old Testament.
“Why does the Old Testament make such a wrong judgment?”
I am not an ancient biblical scriptorian, you would have to discuss that with someone who is. Personally I am not interested in what the Old Testament has to say on the subject except from a historical standpoint. You brought it up, no one else did.
Do you believe, Mary, that the OT is flawed because of the men who wrote it, i.e., that the law written declaring menstruating women unclean is not inspired/revealed by God?
I do not have an opinion on the matter, in truth. I do not believe menstruating women are unclean, nor have ever been. I already stated this. I believe and trust in my Heavenly Father that He has never said women are unclean because of something they not only have no control over but that is a natural, normal part of life. Whether it is an error of men or a misunderstanding, I cannot say, nor does it concern me. What irritates me is when people try to perpetuate the old idea that menstruation is something to be abhorred, in this so called enlightened age. That opinion has been very detrimental to the mental and emotional and even physical well being of many women for decades. It only needs education to rectify.
Just trying to be clear here.
You then believe that the view given in the OT, that menstruating women are unclean, cannot be inspired by God?
tortdog
I am not sure why this is so important to you. I told you, I do not care what the OT says. I believe in God, I trust Him. My contentions at this time are for the notions held by modern day men, not ancient men.
I’m querying because it interests me – not because I’m trying to trap you or because my testimony is riding on your answer.
I think too often people claim a belief in something, without really considering what all those beliefs entail. Like the born-again Christian who claims the Bible is infallible, without considering the obvious errors that the current versions contain.
Your statement gave me cause to believe that you considered the Old Testament to not be written correctly, as to the doctrine relating to unclean women.
I already said it doesn’t matter and I don’t have an opinion on the subject. But I do believe in Article of Faith #8.
I think there’s a difference between a mistranslation of a prophet’s revelation/writings (Hebrew to Greek to English) and a misinterpretation (prophet didn’t get it written down correctly).
You two need a bucket of soap water and a mop.
George
My original contention was with your statement of mentioning tampons and sanitary napkins as being impolite. I don’t agree. If you have a problem with women having periods you live on the wrong planet.
Mary Siever said: “George
My original contention was with your statement of mentioning tampons and sanitary napkins as being impolite. I don’t agree. If you have a problem with women having periods you live on the wrong planet.”
What I wrote was “Plus soap in the dispensers and paper towells and women items cleaned out of the containers.”
Why all the feminist jargon on spelling out the words tampons and sanitary napkins when we are discussing cleaning a building?
You seem to be accusing me of something when between you and tortdog you have about 25 postings about women’s periods.
This is way off topic and Kim really should move the last 25 post or so to the Bill Thread.
Just to make sure you understand – You have been discussing periods with tortdog and not George. George and tortdog are two different people.
George has only written about cleaning the building.
Off topic – tortdog – the OT also describes the proper way to relieve ones food by products. Why do we not follow this scripture? No toliets to clean if we did.