Streaming Sacrament Meeting

At one of the tech talk sessions this evening, someone asked about potential for streaming sacrament meetings for shut-ins. Not really "building to building", but is this something that we want to explore? What tools are available for doing this? Do we need high speed internet access at our ward buildings to support this?

Our stake, like some others, has very remote units. We have two some 70 miles away across the sea. A solution to involve them in live stake leadership meetings, etc would be a great blessing to them. Despite best efforts from stake leaders to stay in touch there is always a feeling of remoteness for them as they cannot participate and conferences, etc are always viewed late via tape/DVD.

Any technological solution to assist in involving them more would be wonderful.

BYUTV does have a sacrament meeting which is broadcast and is available over the internet. A problem with doing a sacrament meeting for a particular ward is how do you manage the content? Do these shut-ins or people far away have high speed internet? Do you want just audio or video also? Who and how do you do all of the recording? What is the cost of the equipment? One simple solution my ward does is tape record some of the meetings and then take the tapes to the shut-ins. I am not trying to be negative but these are real problems that need solutions to get this to work.

mulhollandj wrote:One simple solution my ward does is tape record some of the meetings and then take the tapes to the shut-ins.

This is a good idea, but doesn't scale if you have more than just one or two who need to receive the meeting. Perhaps the Church could identify suitable software for producing recordings and provide infrastructure (via the ward web site, for example) to deliver the recorded sessions. I know we have several technically minded people who would be happy to bring a laptop to church and produce the recording, then take care of uploading it somewhere. This would also be advantageous to people who have to work on Sunday and can't attend their meetings.

Currently, our ward serves our shut-ins by having a couple of priests take the sacrament to them each Sunday. This is great and lets them receive the sacrament, but still leaves them without directed messages that our ward leaders feel are important for our ward members.

And I don't think you were being negative. I appreciate all suggestions, ideas, and concerns. Thanks for your comments.

Another solution is to use a digitial recorder and then burn it to a CD to take to people. CDs are now very cheap and the priests can take it over when they take the sacrament or a home teacher could deliver it. I think that you do want to maintain personal contact with people and that is an easy thing to lose when you use too much technology.

Before ANY recordings or transmissions of any kind are done, please check with your ecclesiastical leaders to ensure that what you are talking about conforms to Church policy.

Tom

I like the idea of taking something to the shut in members. Assuming we have permission from our leaders, I think mp3's might be the cheapest and easiest. One can buy a mp3 recording device for less than $20. It can then be e-mail to members if it is impossible to get out there. If they can be visited (and probably should) the mp3 can be put on their computer and reused at no additional cost. Just an idea...

I agree that streaming sacrament meetings over the Internet for shut-ins is a really nice way to use the technology investment every week instead of just twice a year for Stake Conferences. However, internally we need to address some aspects of current policy that would prohibit this use of the technology. Since this forum is for technology discussions I am going to side-step the policy issue and talk about some of the other issues surrounding streaming a sacrament meeting:

Is there a way to put the camera in the chapel such that it isn't a distraction for other members.

Some of the encoders we've looked at for Stake Conference produce moderate fan noise. It's just white noise but I wonder if it would be distracting.

Often ward meetings are more intimate than stake meetings - does streaming impact this? During our sacrament meeting last week we had a 30+ year old brother speak in front of a congregation for the first time in his life. I found myself wondering if I had placed a camera in the chapel whether he would have felt as comfortable speaking so personally. I realize that people can get used to the technology - but in some cases it may be an impact.

Regarding audio recording -- even though there are very few places in the chapel where you can get line-level output, there is usually tape recorder (often under the sacrament table) connected to the sound system for the express purpose of making recordings. Talk to your local priesthood leaders about the appropriate use of this device.

mulhollandj wrote:BYUTV does have a sacrament meeting which is broadcast and is available over the internet.

I've watched this a few times, but each time I was left feeling something was missing. It doesn't replace the need people have to be connected to their own ward. Seeing and hearing *your* bishop seems important.

mulhollandj wrote: A problem with doing a sacrament meeting for a particular ward is how do you manage the content? Do these shut-ins or people far away have high speed internet?

In many cases they will not. Technologies that also time shift the event (recordings) will have the upper leg here. I think it was Dennis Ritchie who said something to the effect of "never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of magnetic tapes rolling down the highway."

However, streaming has some advantages, as people feel more connected to the message when it is live. Otherwise we'd dump the satellite system and just send out the DVDs a few weeks later.

mulhollandj wrote: Do you want just audio or video also? Who and how do you do all of the recording?

Same questions regardless of if you are timeshifting or live, right?

good questions.

I think that we need to look at this from the perspective of two groups, shut-ins and people who have to travel too far to church. Both have different needs. These needs need to be determined on an individual basis by the local ecclesiastical leaders. I have two big non-technical concerns. The first is that people will have a better excuse to miss church services because they can just download them. The second is that they will lose personal interaction through a general email with the services attached.

mulhollandj wrote: ... people will have a better excuse to miss church services because they can just download them. ... they will lose personal interaction ...

these may be some of the reasons behind the policy as it currently stands.

Seems like everything else is a podcast these days...why not church services. :p

pwhiting wrote:these may be some of the reasons behind the policy as it currently stands.

So I have to whole-heartedly agree with pwhiting here. I still don't like having a prayer over a phone for meetings and such. Can't really put my finger on it, but it just isn't the same and now we are talking about recording it and having a delay involved.

mulhollandj wrote:I have two big non-technical concerns. The first is that people will have a better excuse to miss church services because they can just download them. The second is that they will lose personal interaction through a general email with the services attached.

Let me add a 3rd: distribution control. If it's offered in a format that's easy to distribute (such as MP3), one could find some talks going far outside their intended audience. If only the last meeting were available in a streaming format on the ward website, I think it would be less likely to get out of control. (Yes, I know anything can be captured by someone with the technical ability - but that takes work.)

While podcast, internet streaming, and mp3 recording are all good ideas, I don't know about your units but the majority of the shutins in our stake do not have internet or an mp3 player. They are in their later years and aren't really interested in this technology.

Another problem with recording and playing back later is they don't really feel a part of the ward. There's something different with hearing it live vs recorded.

One idea is looking into a VOIP (Voice Over IP) solution with a PBX where users can use a regular telephone to dial a number. They will be asked for a 4 digit pass code and then connected to something similar to a conference call. At the meeting house, the mic audio feed would be piped into a computer that feeds the audio to the VOIP.

This would allow them to dial in at sacrament time and listen in to the talks. Once set up, it would also be less work than most other solutions.

I've been looking into this a little and hope to be able to find a solution. The cost of this would be broadband connection to the building and a VOIP phone number.

tleish wrote:One idea is looking into a VOIP (Voice Over IP) solution with a PBX where users can use a regular telephone to dial a number.

That sounds like a good idea for the shut-ins, but it doesn't address the needs of those who are unable to attend due to scheduling conflicts. For them the streaming audio from the website might be a better fit. It's entirely possible that this will requires two different solutions to meet everyone's needs.

tleish wrote:
One idea is looking into a VOIP (Voice Over IP) solution with a PBX where users can use a regular telephone to dial a number. They will be asked for a 4 digit pass code and then connected to something similar to a conference call. At the meeting house, the mic audio feed would be piped into a computer that feeds the audio to the VOIP.

whether or not we use voip, the idea of using audio bridging has merit. It would be relatively easy to tie the audio from a building into the phone system. Someone in the meetinghouse would call a conference bridge and then connect the phone to the building's audio output. Homebound members could call the same bridge to listen to the meeting. The bridge could be set up to mute all lines except the meetinghouse's.

pwhiting wrote:whether or not we use voip, the idea of using audio bridging has merit. It would be relatively easy to tie the audio from a building into the phone system. Someone in the meetinghouse would call a conference bridge and then connect the phone to the building's audio output. Homebound members could call the same bridge to listen to the meeting. The bridge could be set up to mute all lines except the meetinghouse's.

Exactly... so the question is, how can we affordably do this. Our Stake Presidency wants to do this and we have been trying to research solutions for this.

tleish wrote:Exactly... so the question is, how can we affordably do this. Our Stake Presidency wants to do this and we have been trying to research solutions for this.

Any idea how many people per Sacrament meeting you're talking about?

A quick google showed that you can do up to 4 Skype users for free.

Freeconference is free, but user's will probably have to pay long-distance charges to wherever an available conference bridge is located.

I see ads for others charging 4-6¢ per person per minute. That adds up to $2.80-4.20/per person per meeting. You might look around your area and see who is local (no toll charge) and see if they can cut you a better rate for Sunday usage. (non-business day).

I think you may need to sound out the SP on how much he's willing to pay. Phone lines are nice, but I suspect there will be significant operating costs. And there may be toll costs as well. Internet is much cheaper, but then you have problems of getting to all the users.

RussellHltn, all of the solutions you are suggesting we've been looking into. It's different for every Stake, but in our Stake there's an average of 6-10 shut-ins per ward.

Most of our shut-ins do not have internet service in the home. They do however have phones, I believe the policy restriction is for video not for audio, is that right? I have been trying to find a conf. call solution that is low cost. We have on average 5 shut-ins per ward and 10 cents a minute (the lowest I have found) is still to expensive. Do any of you have any leads on a phone solution?

paul.harris wrote: I have been trying to find a conf. call solution that is low cost. We have on average 5 shut-ins per ward and 10 cents a minute (the lowest I have found) is still to expensive. Do any of you have any leads on a phone solution?

The Church has a contract with a large telecommunications provider that should be about half that cost. For more information regarding this service and how to get it set up for your unit contact Nolan Adams (adamsnd@ldschurch.org).

Eventually we'll figure out what information we can post wrt these instructions - for now we'll be vague and ask you to send email to Nolan.

The Juneau Alaska Stake has cameras mounted in the chapel for broadcasting stake conference, stake women's conference and such. We use a live internet feed and a Getner (sp?) system for the audio. We have speakers from the outlying wards and branches give talks and prayers during the meeting. At least one of our sites participates from home.

It is non obtrusive and adds a lot to making the stake feel connected even though we span two countries and hundreds of miles.

tleish wrote:Exactly... so the question is, how can we affordably do this.

As far as physically connecting the audio from your meeting to the bridge you have a few challenges. To get line-level audio injected into your phone system you'll need an EJ10 (http://www.emtechelectronics.com/emtech ... 83a646bbed) (link provided so you can recognize the device, not to advertise) or a TTIA (//http://www.emtechelectronics.com/emtech/pages/products.jsp?prodid=473c3468f9e908a646bbed). There is a decent chance your building already has one of these devices. Recently buildings have been receiving EJ8s, which unfortunately do not have the phone jack.

If you end up needing to purchase something, Emtech makes a device specifically for briding the PA system to the phone system: the EJT. I'm sure other manufactures have similar products.

The second problem is getting line-level audio into the device - generally we do not have a phone line near an audio output jack (look for audio out under your sacrament table or near your podium.) One option is to use the comtek wireless audio used for assistive listening (http://www.comtek.com/pro_audio/pr75.html). You may need to use a splitter and plug in the included earpiece to get the device to power up.

[Tip of the hat to Glen Meyer for providing the info above - he'll be following this discussion and can respond to more detailed questions.]

The main reason we hold weekly sacrament meetings is to partake of the sacrament. No technology will replace the priesthood in action with a visit to bring the sacrament. Given that, the real solution for shut-ins is a visit from Home teachers, who may be able to deliver a recording on some media (DVD) of the sacrament meeting along with the more important ordinance.

I believe that they were just refering to getting the messages to the members who couldn't come for certian reasons. Of course the sacrament is the most important point, and after the meeting the home teachers would still come over to provide that ordinance. It was just so that the members didn't miss out on so much as they were before.

In the Provo tech talk Mr(bro)(boss) Dehlin mentioned that "all" buildings by now were supposed to be broadband connected. Ours, in N.E Orem are not. (We connect via wireless from surrounding homes to do missionary apps and such) So, who can I chat with about connectivity for these "already connected" buildings? ALSO, why not have a "rental" of streaming and projection equipment for stake conferences?

John
801-222-0222

John Lockwood wrote:In the Provo tech talk Mr(bro)(boss) Dehlin mentioned that "all" buildings by now were supposed to be broadband connected. Ours, in N.E Orem are not. (We connect via wireless from surrounding homes to do missionary apps and such) So, who can I chat with about connectivity for these "already connected" buildings? ALSO, why not have a "rental" of streaming and projection equipment for stake conferences?

John

For technical help, I recommend you go through the normal church support system in place to support local units. I don't know who that is but your leadership should have information about this.

Tom

John Lockwood wrote:In the Provo tech talk Mr(bro)(boss) Dehlin mentioned that "all" buildings by now were supposed to be broadband connected.

There must have been a miscommunication. About 5000 buildings worldwide have been connected by a project approved by the Presiding Bishopric. The primary customer for these connections has been the family history department.

John Lockwood wrote:why not have a "rental" of streaming and projection equipment for stake conferences?

regionally allocated equiptment (FM group, area, whatever) is being considered.

there are companies that rent gear out for this very purpose - most of the ones I've seen are targetting the building-to-building problem with line-of-sight solutions.

It was interesting to review where we have come from. I realize that this is an old thread, but it was fun to reread what was being discussed 3 years ago. I make this commentary because I am currently streaming sacrament meeting and the whole 3-hour block each week. i am doing it with the least amount of equipment that I can think of. Let me list them: Dell laptop running Win7 with Meetinghouse webcast software on it and a logitech Quick cam Pro for laptops. I am plugged into power and network at the podium and set the laptop on a small stool (borrowed from the drinking fountain) behind the modesty rail with the webcam on the mounting stick that comes with it sitting on the side of the podium aimed at the speaker. That is the only thing visible to the congregation.

I am able to use a wireless mouse to mute and un-mute the mic and camera during the sacrament. After sacrament meeting I unplug and carry back to the RS room where gospel doctrine is held. Set up restart the same stream and leave it on for both SS class and RS held in the same room.

This has been a wonderful blessing to the sister who has cancer in my ward and is not able to join us. Her husband and son are then able to give her the sacrament after the block when they get home.

For this situation I cannot think of a better solution and am very grateful for the technology and how it is blessing this member and families lives.

I just thought I would share how I was doing this so that you can see that some methods can be very small and others, like for stake conference can be very large. I would not recommend using this solution for a stake conference, just like using two or more cameras and words to the hymns overlayed on the screen for a weekly ward sacrament meeting would not be appropriate in my mind.

Anyway, I hope this helps some decide on how they might choose to move forward. Depending on what their individual needs are.

Thanks,
Troy

pwhiting wrote:regionally allocated equiptment (FM group, area, whatever) is being considered.

there are companies that rent gear out for this very purpose - most of the ones I've seen are targetting the building-to-building problem with line-of-sight solutions.

Hi Troy,

This sounds great. Just a logistical question, I haven't been able to find how to mute the audio or video using the Webcast software. Can you point me in the right direction? Do you know if it's possible to change audio/video sources mid-stream?

Thanks in advance,
Lionel

I would think that muting sound could be done at the camera level, or microphone level if that is input separately, before it even goes to the stream, usually in a situation like for example, a broadcast program that is done live, the camera operator or sound man can kill the sound when not needed.

JamesAnderson wrote:I would think that muting sound could be done at the camera level, or microphone level if that is input separately, before it even goes to the stream, usually in a situation like for example, a broadcast program that is done live, the camera operator or sound man can kill the sound when not needed.

In the configuration that Troy mentioned - i.e. using a Logitech webcamera - I don't believe there's a mute function on the camera itself. I have since discovered, though, that Windows 7 allows you to mute the audio source directly.

I use the audio and video mute on the logitech tool bar. There is a shade option that does both with one click, but I have not been able to make that work well for me yet. The nice thing about that option is that you can select a picture of the Savior to be displayed during the sacrament which would be really nice. I'll let you know when I get that working.
Troy

lionelwalters wrote:In the configuration that Troy mentioned - i.e. using a Logitech webcamera - I don't believe there's a mute function on the camera itself. I have since discovered, though, that Windows 7 allows you to mute the audio source directly.

It's now 11 years since this thread originated. Technology is advanced to the point that live streamin the block would be very simple on any number of platforms.

Unfortunately I was exposed to and lived in toxic mold for several months. Now my resilience to even the most minute amount of mold is nil, causing painful contractures/dystonia and respiratory arrest. Needless to say, going to church (and 70% of all buildings, stores, restaurants, and even doctor's offices) in my area has become impossible. It is a long healing process, made more difficult because I am missing out on the spiritual boost of actively participating in weekly meetings.

I hope I can get approval to live stream our meetings. It's been months since I could attend a full sacrament meeting without ending up in the hospital.

loflorian wrote: ...

I hope I can get approval to live stream our meetings. It's been months since I could attend a full sacrament meeting without ending up in the hospital.

Having a family member who also suffers from reactions to mold, I understand at least a little of those frustrations. I don't know the answer about live streaming. However, there might be an alternative that would be a little closer than nothing.

Have you talked with your bishop about at least getting audio recordings of the post-ordinance portion of sacrament meeting? At least in past years, that was specifically allowed for those who physically cannot attend meetings. In fact, several years ago, I was instructed that is the purpose for the 'Record Out' jack built in to the chapel PA system. Of course, the presiding officer (bishop, stake presidency member, etc.) has the final decision about recording any specific meeting.

Church policy still forbids video recordings in the chapel or webcasting any events from the chapel. That's not something the local leaders can override on their own authority.

Audio recordings as rmrichesjr mention appear acceptable. In the past, the church as staged sacrament meetings for broadcast. You may be able to find those. Of course there is general conference and any number of devotionals available.

As for the sacrament itself, your ward should be making arrangements to bring that to you.

Usage Guidelines
Handbook 2: Administering the Church, 21.2.10 states that meetings or events held in the chapel are to not be broadcast over the Internet. The exception is webcasting when approved by the stake president (see 18.3.1). Webcasts should not be used to broadcast ordinances such as baptisms or the administration of the sacrament.

Meetinghouse webcasts are intended to be used to broadcast events from one Church building to other Church buildings. Webcasting to locations other than Church buildings should only be done under the direction of the event's presiding authority.

Seems with both Stake pres. and Bishop approval you could webcast to a chronically ill person to their home...of course each individuals circumstance is different and would be considered case by case

TAMATI wrote:Usage Guidelines
Handbook 2: Administering the Church, 21.2.10 states that meetings or events held in the chapel are to not be broadcast over the Internet. The exception is webcasting when approved by the stake president (see 18.3.1). Webcasts should not be used to broadcast ordinances such as baptisms or the administration of the sacrament.

I'm not sure where you're seeing that. Handbook 2: 21.2.10 that's on-line says "Meetings and other events that are held in the chapel may not be broadcast over the Internet or by any other means (see 18.3.1 for an exception)."

Section 18.3.1 is titled "Stake Conference".

Based on that, I'd say any permission to broadcast from the chapel (except for Stake Conference) would require approval from someone higher than a stake president.

I recommend audio-only as well, not only for policy reasons, but for bandwidth, ease of setup, and minimizing the intrusion upon the spirit of the meeting. For a few weeks I've been testing audio-only recording and streaming with a Raspberry Pi, USB audio adapter, and Darkice streaming to Icecast in MP3 format. The entire setup is tucked away under the Sacrament table, tied to the record output with an attenuator, connected via Wifi. With a mono feed, 8 kB/s (about 64 kbps) data rate, the audio quality is really very good, the latency is on the order of 15-30 seconds, and I'm getting surprisingly little loss/drop even with the Pi connected through the building WiFi (even with 100+ mobile devices on the WiFi in the building!). A few cron jobs to start and stop the processes and I no longer have to record meetings on my phone for some of the shut-ins in our Stake (with the corresponding very poor audio quality).

I could post instructions if anyone is interested in trying a similar setup. In case you want to try it out yourself in the mean time, I suggest running Icecast locally on the Pi, and connect to a separate off-site server to mirror the stream(s) on its own Icecast process via OpenVPN to provide the stream to those at home.

Please note that Handbook 2: 21.2.10
"Taking photographs or making video recordings in chapels is not permitted. Meetings and other events that are held in the chapel may not be broadcast over the Internet or by any other means (see 18.3.1 for an exception)."

I read that to say that webcasting of even audio-only is prohibited. 18.3.1 refers to Stake Conference.

Not to sow seeds of debate, but there would seem to be a little wiggle room for local bishop interpretation. Considering that the first quoted sentence is clearly strictly about the visual aspects of events in the chapel, it would seem possible that a reasonable bishop or member of a stake presidency could consider the second sentence to also refer to the visual aspects. Being as distribution of audio recordings is reportedly specifically allowed (subject to presiding officer permission), it could be viewed that merely speeding up that process (with a 15-30 second latency) is not too drastically different from distributing a physical recording after the meeting.

Maybe. But I'm sure one of the concerns that prompted that policy was to make sure that talks stay within the boundaries of the unit and does not go "world wide". As I recall, the design of the church-supplied webcast portal reflects that.

I'd also be careful about what is broadcast. I can't find it now, but I seem to remember verbiage that prohibited broadcasting any ordinance, including the sacrament.

Agreed, especially about the sacrament ordinance. I recall a briefing in 2004 from the PA system consultant sent by Church headquarters that recommended having the priests manually start the cassette recorder at the time they were dismissed to sit with their families. To confine the boundaries and prevent world-wide broadcast, I would think a per-week passcode sent to the ward's shutins would be reasonable protection.

Most, if not all, chapels broadcast already via radio. Based on that interpretation we need to remove the assistive listening system from our building. If not for the high cost of the receivers and the poor audio quality, we would be using them instead.

jeremywillden wrote:Most, if not all, chapels broadcast already via radio.

Is a radio transmission that barely gets to the edge of the property (if it gets there at all) a "broadcast"?

The sound system is equipped by the church - it is not set up by the wards. What we're discussing in this thread is units doing something on their own.

With all due respect, russellhltn, By the FCC definition, yes, it is. The transmission goes a lot further than that, it's just the poor antennas and low-sensitivity receive circuitry in the assistive listening receivers that reduce the range. The signal is not encrypted and can be received by anyone with a radio scanner or other receiver. A radio transmission of a few milliwatts can travel long distances, depending on frequency, antenna height, terrain, and other factors.

This is the reason that the translation systems in some church facilities use Infrared transmissions -- they are strictly line-of-sight (other than any possible signal leakage from the building wiring).

As the links to both the live stream and archived files are only accessible to people to whom I have sent the link, and that I have explicit approval from my local priesthood leadership, I'm not concerned, and only offered my expertise as a service to others. I haven't had any takers thus far, for what that's worth. I just personally felt it was well aligned with the Savior's instruction to "feed my sheep." We have a lot of people in our Stake that miss out on the fellowship and instruction of the meetings each week, and distributing a single audio cassette (by hand) every week is quite impractical.

If anyone is interested in the methods I'm using, feel free to send me a private message and I'll try to help you out -- it's been a real blessing to the members in my Ward and Stake.

My experiments so far to mute the stream when the sacrament mic is active haven't worked out yet (turns out the Ivie microphone consumes current from the mixer's phantom power all the time -- I was going to use that current to trigger an optoisolator to mute the audio or pause the stream), so that process has been manual so far. I'll post an update once I've solved that issue, either in software or hardware.

Of course, there isn't a mute on these links, which contain essentially the same audio: =-)
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mor ... tickyAudio
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mor ... tickyAudio

Jeremywillden, I think you have some good points there.

As the links to both the live stream and archived files are only accessible to people to whom I have sent the link, ...

One concern/suggestion I would offer is to make sure the links are complex enough to offer at least a reasonable approximation to cryptographic security to reduce the likelihood that a random web crawler would stumble on the link. Just my opinion, but I think password authentication would be a further improvement.

jeremywillden wrote:As the links to both the live stream and archived files are only accessible to people to whom I have sent the link, and that I have explicit approval from my local priesthood leadership,

As long as it doesn't become a problem to the point that a higher authority gets wind of it, you may be OK.

I would be mindful of the unit boundaries and avoid supplying the stream to someone who is not a member if your ward. This is in line with the geographical limits of Priesthood Keys. (Handbook 2: 2.1.1)

Hi I m putting a proposal together for of a live audio conference call to be utilised, for sacrament - it’s low tech but may meet the needs , I got this idea from the the jehovah wittnesses incase you want to see a working system . If your sick / house bound/ mental health constraints etc and can’t make it to church you can call in to a live audio conference call - a phone line is installed to the pulpit area phone system linked to the amp - member of the bishopric opens a conference call beginning of the program - members dial in to listen - the jehovah witnesses have a clerk who mans the phone to get numbers of those listening before transferring them into the conference call . It could be used to identify those wanting the sacrament to be delivered etc too - with a growing aging population the sick and the needy will increase - I’ve just been released as bishop after serving for 6 years in a ward of 180 sacrament attendance . Our local phone carrier charges 20cents a min for conference calling , so would only cost $12 per sacrament to potentially have access to attending a sacrament meeting from Home - not sure if it will get through all the hurdles but have an area 70 happy to bounce the idea - just got called to the high council and have technology specialist as a portfolio - thought if there were any holes or suggestions this could be the place to iron things out before submitting my proposal

jermshp: Consider some of the Asterisk-based conference call systems for hosting the call. It's possible to set up a call with all the participants (but one) muted, so noise from the homes of the participants doesn't mix in with the rest of the audio. This is how Asterisk phone systems implement paging groups.

jermshp wrote:Hi I m putting a proposal together for of a live audio conference call to be utilised, for sacrament - it’s low tech but may meet the needs , I got this idea from the the jehovah wittnesses incase you want to see a working system . If your sick / house bound/ mental health constraints etc and can’t make it to church you can call in to a live audio conference call - a phone line is installed to the pulpit area phone system linked to the amp - member of the bishopric opens a conference call beginning of the program - members dial in to listen - the jehovah witnesses have a clerk who mans the phone to get numbers of those listening before transferring them into the conference call . It could be used to identify those wanting the sacrament to be delivered etc too - with a growing aging population the sick and the needy will increase - I’ve just been released as bishop after serving for 6 years in a ward of 180 sacrament attendance . Our local phone carrier charges 20cents a min for conference calling , so would only cost $12 per sacrament to potentially have access to attending a sacrament meeting from Home - not sure if it will get through all the hurdles but have an area 70 happy to bounce the idea - just got called to the high council and have technology specialist as a portfolio - thought if there were any holes or suggestions this could be the place to iron things out before submitting my proposal

Handbook 2, 21.2.10, prohibits broadcasting meetings from the chapel, so if you make a recording, it will need to be distributed after the meeting.

Handbook 1, 16.1.5, prohibits recording ordinances (sacrament, confirmation of a new member, etc.), so you will need to start the recording after the sacrament.

If you happen to have a general authority speaking at your sacrament meeting a given week, Handbook 2, 21.1.33, will apply.

Also consider that some members may not want their talks to be recorded or distributed.

I see this thread has gone on now for over 13 years now. So much has changed yet the need is still there. It breaks my heart to think of the people in our ward/stake that have legitimate medical restrictions of leaving their home - yet are only left to having the sacrament delivered to them, and a visit from a ministering brother or sister. Those are all good, but in the Good/Better/Best - I can't help but think of how much a persons heart is lifted when they can see and hear members in the ward/stake, leadership in the ward/stake speak messages they have sought revelation on. They are already in a bad place because they can't go to church. We have the proper technology, we have willing members that will volunteer time and equipment, yet we are hesitant to bring up the need to review and revise the current policy. I have been in the stake presidency and other leadership callings and one training session that stood out to me by a general authority was the need the church has for innovation. RS, seminary, primary, footnotes in the scriptures - all came from ideas members had, that were presented at the right time to the right leadership in the church and they took off.

I am not saying we record and have an open broadcast of the entire church meeting - neither I think are the right approach. What I am thinking and feeling would work well is:

1) utilize the churches web broadcast (secure) system for the access to a live stream that is not recorded
2) the only portion of sacrament that is streamed is AFTER the sacrament is passed (speakers and closing prayer)
3) the stream is approved by the bishop if sacrament / stake president if stake conference for those that need it - i.e. the list of names with reason they are homebound
4) the stream is pass-code/password protected every time it is done, never an open line whenever the stream is live
5) ministering brothers/sisters are helped to help their families to connect when the situation requires a live stream to their home
6) same thing is done for Sunday school every other week now for learning and continuous growth
7) equipment and setup is individual per building and those buildings can work things out to get things setup properly - non distracting camera placement / equipment is silent etc..

I have been trying to make this an acceptable practice/approach for years and will continue to do so until it is adopted, for the help of those saints that need it. "Feed my sheep.." comes to mind often.

Thoughts??

jbowne wrote:I have been trying to make this an acceptable practice/approach for years and will continue to do so until it is adopted, for the help of those saints that need it. ... Thoughts??

You're dealing with a Handbook issue. No one at the local level, nor anyone who reads this forum has any input on the decision.