50 Minute Primary: Friend or Fiend?

I have one thing to say about two-hour church, and it’s this: I approve.

There is really no better feeling than getting out of your second church meeting of the day and realizing that you can just go home right now. I love two-hour church. It is literally the best.

I have heard a handful of not-exactly-complaints from younger parents saying they “kind of miss” that third hour where someone else had charge of their children, and I try to be sympathetic, but it’s hard. I think I remember what it’s like to have little kids—I mean, I’m taking all due precautions to prevent myself from having any again—but I just don’t understand missing, kind of or otherwise, that third hour. Maybe because no hour of church ever felt anything like a respite for me during the eighteen years I dragged my oldest child along. Having to deal with the constant threat of her disrupting other people’s worship and class discussions made that third hour at church more exhausting than an extra hour at home would have been. I don’t know. In any case, I acknowledge that some folks have different experiences. Whether it’s the extra hour of free babysitting or the extra hour of social interaction that you miss, I am sorry for your loss. But I’m afraid nothing can mar the joy of my Sunday afternoon nap.

I am not exactly complaining about the one little wrinkle I’ve noticed when it comes to Primary, which is where I’m currently serving. Since we only have fifty minutes instead of eighty or ninety, and some of that has to be spent transferring 140 children from class to singing time (or vice versa), it leaves about twenty minutes (give or take one minute) to do a lesson. There was a time I would have said twenty minutes was more than enough time for a Primary lesson. That time was when I served in Junior Primary. And probably also when I was teaching Doctrine and Covenants. Now that I’m teaching New Testament in Senior Primary, I’m finding twenty minutes just a touch inadequate.

It’s not that I have sooooooo much material to get through. (Although whose idea it was to cram all of the Sermon on the Mount into two Primary lessons—and one Sunday school lesson—I would really like to know.) I mean, no one expects us to cover everything, and besides, the kids will probably have forgotten all of it by the time they reach the parking lot, so whatever. But Jesus actually had some pretty cool teachings, so I kind of want to get through some of the material. I also want to spend some time getting to know the kids in my class, since I think relationships will prove more memorable than lessons in the long run (and probably in the short run also). In the past I had always started class with about ten minutes of talking about what everyone did during the week. And going off on tangents was no big deal when we had forty-five freaking minutes to kill. Now I find myself trying to cram the how-was-y’all’s-week chit-chat into the two minutes we have before my co-teacher arrives (that is, if I’m not the one arriving last), and someone going off on a tangent (which means every single other kid will also take a turn on that tangent) can eat through most of our class time.

My co-teacher and I are still trying to work out the calculus of structuring our lessons so we get a good balance of gospel-related discussion versus “once my brother threw up on an airplane” type discussion. Today we were discussing treasures in heaven versus treasures on earth, which led to a robust discussion of everyone’s earthly treasures. I really enjoyed that discussion. And we did talk a little bit about heavenly treasures eventually. The lesson turned out fine. I’m still kind of sad we couldn’t have a less-rushed discussion of what it means to “judge not.” And we never got around to the Golden Rule. So, okay, maybe the problem is that there’s too much material. But that’s not two-hour church’s fault. It’s the fault of whoever drew up the lesson schedule. I fault you, lesson scheduler! But I do not condemn you.

During today’s class time I did conclude that there are too few Primary class minutes to spend any of them explaining King James English. I know why the church uses the King James translation. And heretofore I have always used the KJV for Primary because that is the version of the scriptures the kids have (and some of them actually do enjoy looking things up in their own scriptures). I feel pretty strongly about engaging the actual text during class, if only briefly, because I was an English major and if the text itself isn’t essential, it’s like all the years I’ve spent reading things have been in vain. Anyway, having zero minutes to spare on anything that isn’t about Jesus or the kids, it just strikes me as a great waste of time to have kids read verses that are often unintelligible to the average adult, let alone the average nine-year-old. So starting with my next lesson, we are going to read the Bible in normal English in between talking about our stuffed animal collections and adventures with the Tooth Fairy.

Anyway, to sum up, two-hour church is awesome. Primary will continue to be an adjustment, perhaps for most of this year. But ditching sharing time was a good call. (It was exactly what I did in my Fantasy Two Hour Church planning sessions of yore. COINCIDENCE? Or the Holy Spirit pouring itself out upon the world? You decide.) Just having singing time is great, provided you aren’t one of those music leaders who have to cover both junior and senior Primary. (I hereby go on record as supporting two-deep Primary music leadership in all wards, regardless of staffing limitations. I shall march on your behalf if it comes to that.)

What has your experience been so far with fifty-minute Primary?

Comments

  1. My teaching partner decided to focus on only one thing with our eight-year-old students today, and it was The Golden Rule. I thought it was a great choice, and she taught it so well. But I agree that there is SO much more to the Sermon on the Mount that I wish we had time to discuss. I hope that they are learning the other stuff at home.

    I’ve noticed that our Primary music leader is also incorporating the week’s Come Follow Me lesson into her Singing Time every week. Is this happening in other wards?

  2. OregonMum says:

    I also wish we had more time in class to talk with my senior primary kids. Last year I felt that we had some amazing discussions. Right now I feel like I have enough time to pick two of the paragraphs in the “teaching older kids” section and do those. I too feel that’s it’s really important for the kids to know that I care about them and value them being there. So I make a point to remember who had a swim meet, a dance recital, who had a cool homeschool experience and more to ask them about. It’s really their parents job to teach them the gospel. It’s my job to make those kids feel like it’s a safe place to ask questions, for them to have a positive church experience and to feel and recognize the spirit. I think I get that last one maybe 1-2 times a month.

    As for junior primary, I don’t teach it right now but from past experience I think 20-25 minutes is perfect!

  3. I do hope the idea that it is the parents job to teach the gospel and the teachers to build relationships does not take hold. I grew up in a part member but inactive family. When I began attending church I craved learning the gospel. Church was where I got all of it. Nothing yo be learned at home.

  4. I have all the same thoughts. 45 minutes was too long, and now 20 is too short. I wish we could shave a couple minutes out of singing time and/or sacrament meeting to stretch my lesson time to 30 minutes. As a lover of language, I also want to help them learn KJV English, in great part because the better they can read scriptures the more defenses they have against prooftexted interpretations. But there’s just no time to waste on teaching Shakespearean vocabulary if you want to get the point of a lesson across.

    Also, I love that there’s no prayer at the end of singing time or at the beginning of class time. Having three back-to-back meetings in 3 hours all open and close with a prayer never made sense to me.

  5. My wife is serving in Junior Primary (CTR 4s), and I’ve been subbing for her co-teacher most of this year, and we absolutely love the 20 minute lessons. The kids don’t get nearly as antsy or bored. But I think you make a great point that Senior Primary is different; that makes a lot of sense to me. Maybe in an ideal world where logistics were no concern, each older class would get another 5 minutes of lesson time than they had the year before.

    And amen to the point about relationships being what really sticks with students.

  6. I teach 11 year olds and am finding we are spending most of our time dissecting the language. I put the scripture on the board, give each kid a clipoard with the scripture for them to ‘rewrite’ and then we go through it figuring out what all these words mean. Usually we get some great conversation out of just the words (hypocrite today was a lot of fun).

    20 minutes is not enough time though. I always start five minutes early, which helps a tad.

  7. I’m not in Primary—and pretty much never been—but what about using Tom Wayment’s modern translation of the Bible for LDS? Type up the verses that will be covered since the kids won’t have that version and pass those around. They can read and see how the modern language compares to the KJV. As to “I know why the church uses the KJV” that ship has sailed. It’s obviously not used in the Church in any language other than English. In other languages the Church privileges the most modern translations. Why is it that English-speaking Saints have to read God’s word in 17th Century language no one speaks or understands anymore? Makes no sense.

  8. MS, I do that and it helps. The kids all know how to look up verses in Wayment’s and compare words. But since the KJV isn’t going away, the kids need to know how to approach the language either way.

  9. Beth Lundgreen says:

    I teach the 9 year olds and I don’t think 20 minutes is enough time, especially since some of the class won’t be learning the lessons at home. It is much easier to prepare for the shorter lessons and I like that. I’d prefer to see class and singing time alternate every other week. Although, I can see how 20 minutes is more than enough for junior primary.

  10. I thought 20 minutes for the lesson would be bliss, but it’s a tad short. I would prefer 30 minutes. I teach Jr. Primary, and it goes by almost too fast. I really want to have time to connect and chat with the kids, but if you do that you seriously only have maybe 10 minutes for the lesson. Our music leader does both junior AND senior music time. It seems like they should release a Primary counselor and have 2 music leaders instead so they could alternate weeks or do just senior or junior primary.

  11. pamelaweste says:

    When I first heard of the time change I thought primary would be hardest hit. I still feel that way, even though personally I like the shortened schedule. I teach 3-4 year olds, and 20 minutes is not enough. It feels so rushed. I don’t see how 20 can possibly be enough for the older children.

    We are a small primary, so jr. and sr. are together for singing time. I miss sharing time, the games, the teaching of the whole group together and the interaction between the adults and children. I notice now that the children aren’t given any time to share their thoughts, answer questions, etc. There’s not time. If I were in a presidency again, I would change it up a bit, and have the presidency teach a little (maybe not every week), have a story, give the children a chance to share, and have some games once in a while. It would give the music leader a little break, too. We have a full presidency with 4 people, and they don’t really have anything to do.

  12. Kevin Barney says:

    I’ve never served in Primary, but that’s my wife’s permanent calling.[1] So I just asked her about it. She agreed it’s a little tight; I suspect she would agree with the preference for 30 minutes. (She teaches the 10 and 11 year olds.)

    [1] A couple of years ago when our bishop was first called, I had a conversation with him. I suggested it can be hard to staff Primary, as most of those women are gnawing at their ankles counting the days until they can go back to RS. He acknowledged that was true. So I said that’s not Sandy; she loves teaching Primary, and RS is just not her jam; she’ll never go back to RS. He’s a smart man, so in Primary she remains.

  13. Maryanne says:

    I’m primary president in my ward and we have senior primary classes meet first— partly with the hope that the ten minute transition time from sacrament meeting will end up being senior primary class time because the kids certainly don’t use that ten minutes just to get there. Our wonderful singing leader loves doing singing time and wishes she had more time so we have tried to streamline the transition time (fewer announcements, birthdays acknowledged once for the month, chairs set up so we can merely take away one row of junior primary chairs and be set for senior). My counselors are also teachers (because we really don’t need all those leaders for Sundays anymore and because we don’t have enough people to fill both needs otherwise), one in junior and one in senior and are so far happy with the much shorter time. I love getting to the end of church and not feeling like we’ve been torturing the children by making them sit and listen for so long.

  14. Kevin Barney says:

    Maryanne, great idea to leverage and use much of those transition times!

  15. Aussie Mormon says:

    On a somewhat related note, how is everyone coping with the two-responsible adults per class requirement (Handbook2: 11.8.8)?

  16. Mary Bliss says:

    I found a solution that works great for our Primary class. We have kids who come from families that study always, study sometimes, and never open scriptures, ever.

    Our kids love getting regular mail. I take some time during the first half of the week to send them each a chatty, appreciative, (handwritten—it makes a difference) note that gives a very brief intro into the text we’ll be discussing, an open ended question about it, and a verse where they can find information as they consider their answer. (We gave them each their own copy of the New Testament. Did you know that the Distribution Center has cheap one?)

    I figure that I am just taking time that I used to put into a lot of preparation for a 50 minute class and putting that time into writing short helpful letters instead.

    My kids (ages 8-10) love getting the letters and it saves us “intro to the material” time at he beginning of class and gives them a question they have thought about to discuss right off the bat. It has solved our “not enough time” problem.

  17. Kristin Brown says:

    Mary Bliss, a great idea. Thank you. How many children are in your class?

  18. Mary Bliss, that is a fantastic idea. Kids do love getting mail. Everyone loves getting mail!

  19. Kevin Barney says:

    Mary Bliss, very creative idea!

  20. Mary Bliss says:

    Kristen,
    Currently we have just 5 children in the class but we have done this with up to 9.

  21. alesueur218 says:

    I teach ctr 6 and love the shortened church! We focused on one or two of the lessons from the sermon on the mount. And I sent home a handout for the kids with the rest of the lessons. I try to ask the kids lots of personal/probing questions during the lesson so I learn about each of them (questions that relate to the lessons-asking them about their families-what things are hard for them, what do they pray about most. What they love and treasure at home.). I have been able to skip some of the initial chit chat by incorporating it into the lesson. If that makes sense. I love the letter idea!!!

  22. In my fantasy two hour church, children and teachers are released to go to Primary right after the sacrament. More time for singing time and primary class and no need for kids to sit through the part of sacrament meeting they are never ever going to pay attention to anyway.

  23. Two hour church is great because it means my children get to spend less time “learning” the gospel and plan of salvation from people who don’t even attempt to live up to their level of knowledge anymore. Sadly, we are so good at spitting out answers we didn’t gain (have ratified) through personal revelation, that we’re a church filled with people who know so many answers but enjoy almost every distraction and frivolity, and even transgression, more than a consecrated life becoming like our Father.

    If church was getting it done, we wouldn’t say let’s have less of that. 2hr church is an acknowledgement that we are so bad at the social institution side of a Zion society that even our church needs to be paired back so we can take a generation or two building families. If only our governments were capable of scaling back to such a degree and shifting emphasis so dramatically…

    2hr church is truly great, but I wish we had it for the reason that it wasn’t necessary for us anymore, not that we’ve lived the gospel so I adequately we need to completely retool for a generation. But I’m truly happy we are.

  24. No experience in primary. But I’m with you on the 2-hour thing. I have been contemplating with horror the prospect of having to be at church at 8:30 in the morning starting in May when we move into a new building. But then I realized that means we are done with church at 10:30, and that makes me ridiculously happy.

  25. Bro. Jones says:

    @ Laurel: I’m totally with you on wishing we could steal time from Singing Time. I’ve always loathed Sharing/Singing/Whatever time. In the many years I’ve taught Primary, I’ve worked with exactly two presidencies who ran it well (and in fairness, the curriculum is tough to deal with for anyone). Everywhere else it’s been a slog of boring, out-of-touch lessons for kids from a generation who just aren’t really into singing. I feel like that’s not new: back in the 80s, I remember the kids my age rolling their eyes at songs in school settings. But somehow the curriculum authors still think that kids over 7 are really enjoying singing.

    I asked my 9-yo kids what they wanted in class. They said no to singing, yes to puzzles and stories. I’m still finding a balance–the puzzle I made for this past Sunday took so long that the entire lesson period evaporated. We still squeezed in a couple minutes of discussion on treasures in heaven, and they seemed to really enjoy it. My one kid who can’t sit still or stay on topic will absolutely devour a word puzzle with complete focus, so it’s nice that it meets his learning needs.

  26. I have the Valiant 9 class. Our ward is in the building first, so I’m able to go into the classroom before church and put a (simple) lesson-themed puzzle up on the wall or the blackboard – a small crossword puzzle, a word search, a sentence that has been cut into word blocks that need to be put back into sentence form, a picture that’s been cut into pieces, that sort of thing. The kids take a great deal of pride in finishing the puzzle before I get there, so they race down the hallway, I amble, and when I walk through the door, sometimes they’re done, sometimes they’re not. (It’s still hard to gauge how much time each puzzle will take.) Either way, they’ve been introduced to the lesson topic and we’ve managed to usurp a little transition time for class time. Which is good, because otherwise we would be on the short side. And a couple of side benefits are that 1) the boys and girls work TOGETHER; and 2) it distracts them from that OTHER game, the one where whoever gets there first stacks all the chairs into a tower so nobody else can sit down.

  27. primary pianist says:

    Our ward has already cut singing time down to 15 minutes, giving 30 minutes to the teachers for this reason, and I think it’s right, but as the primary pianist, I’ll just speak up for the music side…there is no way our kids are going to learn 8-10 songs by Sept/Oct for the primary program in just 15 minutes a week, so maybe that will be the next thing to go by the wayside.

  28. Kristine says:

    Yes–even 20 minutes is short for singing time now, because I feel obligated to teach with the Come Follow Me curriculum and can’t focus as much on learning the music. I wouldn’t especially care if the annual Sacrament Meeting program disappeared, but I am sad that all of us will get less music (there’s no time for intermediate hymns in Sacrament Meeting, no time for singing in YW/RS, etc.). On the whole, I think the short schedule has the potential to work out really well, but there are real losses, too.

  29. Jack Hughes says:

    My 8-year-old loves having shorter primary. Before, she frequently complained at how boring it was. And I don’t blame her; 2 hours of primary is too much to ask of a child’s attention span. I remember being that age and also disliking primary, especially how it seemed to stretch on endlessly. It seems like it’s a lot kinder on the folks who run and teach primary as well, and more respectful of their time. I can understand some people lamenting the lack of time to deliver meaningful lessons, but I haven’t heard any such murmurings in my corner of the world. From what I can tell, the shorter format is appreciated by kids, parents and teachers alike.

  30. Another Roy says:

    I agree with the no singing observation of Bro. Jones. I find it further torture that we make the kids MEMORIZE the songs for the primary program. How many adults would go to a church class that memorizes songs? Is this really an effective way to teach the Gospel? Then why do we do it?

  31. Kristine says:

    You are wrong :) Singing is a pretty great way to teach kids, and the songs are a lot less painful than, say, the KJV. Not all Primary music leaders manage to do it painlessly, but I think singing is good for kids generally. I even think some memorization is a good thing, useful brain exercise. Older kids need more challenging music instruction–two part singing, learning to use the hymn book, etc., rather than just endless choose-the-song games and repetition, but I get some pretty enthusiastic singing out of my sr. Primary.

  32. Benjamin says:

    I was under the impression that memorizing songs is actually a very effective teaching tool for young children (emphasis on young). But I’d be open to seeing experts weigh in on what the research has to say on the matter.

  33. I’d have appreciated learning how to read the KJV rather than memorize the same songs for nine years. I’ve never struggled with Jacobean English (which is probably part of why I’m majoring in Medieval and Renaissance Studies now that I’m in college), but my peers and leaders always did. I’ve rarely sung a primary song since the age of twelve but I’ll be dealing with the KJV for, presumably, the rest of my adult life in the church. Songs are great but we need to equip people to read and understand the scriptures on their own.

  34. Mary and I taught a senior Primary class a couple of weeks ago, and I must say that I loved the 20 minute class time. We were able to find a way to make the suggested lesson activities work together in a way that made sense and helped the children learn, and 20 minutes was perfect. We finished with just a couple of minutes to spare. Granted, perhaps it’s different when you have to teach every week.

  35. Kristine says:

    Jessa–I meant no shade about the KJV, which I love. I’m a poetry nerd, so obviously find KJV indispensable. But for brand new readers, it’s mostly pretty confusing, I think.

  36. Kristine: oh, absolutely. I hope we can figure out a way to teach the KJV (or use a different translation for general scripture study… I think that’s what I’d do if I was a primary teacher, and I love hearing about it from teachers who’ve taken that route) someday!

  37. Katie M. says:

    I see a couple comments here about the need to teach kids the KJV because that’s what they’ll need to understand during their lifetime in the church. But I’m not sure that’s so. I’ve been quite surprised by the number and speed with which members in my ward have discarded their KJV NT this year for the Wayment translation. It’s like they were just waiting for the slightest confirmation that it was kosher to do so. As such, I think in less than 10 years, the KJV will cease to be the dominant translation used at church. (Which brings up an interesting question: if members get very used to the plainer English of newer translations of the NT, will that make it harder to transition from it to the KJV-y BOM? And will the Church then someday come out with a “plain English” version of the BOM? I predict it will.)

  38. Is there any “wiggle room”, no pun intended, in the primary schedule? I would change it in two ways:

    1. Do singing time last and not first. Our primary is now meeting in the chapel, and so as soon as sacrament meeting is over we have a major push to get everyone out of the chapel. This is disruptive and (in my opinion) comes at the great cost of discontinuing the significant bonding that goes on along the edges. Don’t talk! Don’t visit! Don’t make friends! Don’t discuss the sacrament meeting that just ended!

    2. I would divide the time between singing and class unevenly. I would give singing time 10 to 15 minutes, and classes 25 to 30 minutes.

    Are we allowed to do that? If we wanted to?

  39. Bro. Jones says:

    @ Kristine: I’m totally with you–it’s absolutely possible to have music instruction tailored to the capabilities and needs of older children. We just don’t do it. The great two great presidencies and music leaders I mentioned had elaborate, interactive lessons involving the songs and the concepts in them. Every other ward I’ve been in has had some variation on this sequence:

    1. Pianist and music leader sing the song. Kids over 7 tune out.
    2. Music leader asks children to join in, and “teaches” the lyrics by holding up some kind of printout. Maybe pictures, maybe just the words. Kids under 7 who can’t keep up with the reading pace tune out.
    3. Repeat step 2, but with “variations” including fast, slow, boys/girls only. Kids fight for the privilege of choosing the variation (by drawing lots or rolling a die) but otherwise tune right the heck out.

    Results: even the kids who pay attention don’t learn the lyrics of anything past the first verse. Most of the other kids are chatting or zoning out. By the time the primary program rolls around, only a handful of kids whose parents taught them the songs at home* know them, everyone else mumbles or tunes out or starts weeping. * I am not one of those parents.

    Could we be teaching our senior primary kids how to read music? How to sing in parts vs. harmony? Theological themes of our songs? Developing mnemonic devices as an intellectual exercise? Integrating humor and silly songs? Making good use of the one time we encourage our children to make a sound in church? Sure we could! Are we? Not in my ward(s).

  40. Larryco_ says:

    I was asked to sub this past Sunday an hour before church. Fortunately it was the CTR7 class, because it’s much easier to teach than the CTW7 (Choose The Wrong) class. Obviously, 20 minutes precludes an in-depth treatise on any topic. So, after we had done our imaginary walk up the mount and I had plopped my 67-year old self on the floor – along with the others – we spent about 2 minutes talking about talking about Jesus, 2 on “peaceMAKING” in our home and school,
    2 on loving people who may be hard to love (“so Jesus really loved Satan?” was my favorite question), from last week’s lesson. And from the current week’s lesson: 2 minutes on alms-giving, 2 on fasting, and 6 on prayer. 5 of 8 children thought that you could pray standing (which became 8 of 8 when they thought about the prayers in Sacrament meeting), 4 of 8 thought you could while sitting, 6 of 8 while you are standing on your head, 8 for 8 on your knees. 4 of 8 thought you could pray silently, 8 for 8 out loud. We finished by talking about offering short, silent prayers throughout the day for things that we’re thankful for.
    All in all…one sweet gig for this old man.

  41. Marmee8 says:

    It is interesting to read about the different primary experiences.
    I love primary now.
    20-25 minutes of class time is great. I have a child who is autistic in my class and this shorter time is much easier for him to deal with.
    I teach the 10-11 year olds. I do not try to teach all of the ideas from the manual each week. I have focused on preparing one activity, with a 2nd as a possible back up if needed. We have usually been fine with the one activity. (The instructions to the Come follow me- for Primary says “Don’t think of these [teaching ideas] as step-by-step instructions but rather as suggestions to spark your inspiration.” It also lists other resources, such as church magazines.) In my class we are in the scriptures each week. I encourage the kids to bring their scriptures from home, or to get some from the ward library if they need some.
    Our ward has a big enough primary that we have Jr opening and singing-time while the Srs have class time, and then there is Sr singing-time and closing while the Jrs have class.
    We have a great music leader who finds new and interesting ways to teach the kids new songs, and she tries to give them a chance to sings other songs they love as well.
    Overall shorter primary is a winner to me.

  42. I have four kids ages 2 – 7, so I’m right in the demographic of “three hour church was better because someone else was watching my kid for another hour”. But I don’t feel that way.
    I also don’t think of it as two hour church. I think of it as three hour church with two in the building and at most an hour of church at home.
    To me, it’s been a great success (thus far), of having a church headquarters correlated lesson for me to teach my kids. It does have a sense of a minimum bar/check box; but I’m doing it. Whereas before I wasn’t. Before I was getting my kids to church, and hopefully there’d be a lesson at home during the week; but now I’m still getting my kids to church but I also am for sure teaching a lesson to my kids at home.
    The only downside is not having Gospel Doctrine every week, but hopefully BCC can make up for that. As for the primary kids; not a single downside.

  43. LatamGirl says:

    I subbed today for the 8-11 year old class. I ended up with nine min for class time (we’re in the middle of trying a new language split for English and the local language and so there are some growing pains). I anticipate in the future there will be about 20 min max for lesson time. This just isn’t enough. I wish there could be a full 30 min and then just 20 for music time (in our case though we’re having to do an opening exercises with everyone combined). I love the new curriculum (though today’s lesson had too much packed into it) and the ease at which we can all study it together as a family. My students were engaged, wanted to share, and I only had time to have them find and then read about 16 verses of Mark 2, show the video is the man with the palsy taking up his bed and walking, and hear 2-3 stories from the children about miracles of priesthood blessings in their lives.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.