- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Just got a message from a Bpric member that someone has moved into the Ward, That I should go see her as her home teacher, and that I have another 18 families to HT. No discussion, no asking me if I wanted to do it, no placing limits on the number of I have to see each month, nothing. I know some of the names — a very ill tempered woman in the Ward who takes everything personally, the YM president, a Bishop’s Counselor, a woman who is blind and disabled, and a whole whack of people I don’t know. I guess in ordaining my son to be a teacher I am now off the wagon and onto the home teaching list.
I have no desire whatsoever to do it now. After years of goading people, I am now the goaded.
What would you do? I have a newly ordained son — he is not on the HT list as my companion, so I don’t know if he’s officially my companion or not. But no one is stopping me from taking him.
How many would you see? What would you do in this situation?
I am also battling the downward spiral of depression right now. Not in it, still functioning, but having trouble staying out of it due to some major set backs in the last week, and looming unemployment. This list of 18 families is the last thing I need.
In my TBM days I would have gone out and seen every one of them, but now I can’t even bring myself to do it.
That is insane. I personally would let your bishop know that you have way too much on your plate to have time to properly be there for that many families and see if he can lower the number to a reasonable amount. If that doesn’t work, I’d probably just focus on whoever seems to have the most needs like maybe the disabled member so they have someone to help them if they need it, but I wouldn’t even attempt to do all of them. Or maybe only see one of them each month. That is way too much to put on anyone. Especially if you’re currently combatting depression, you don’t need to be running yourself ragged trying to see 18 people a month. I don’t think I spend time with 18 people a month even in my spare time. That number just seems impossible and irresponsible of them to expect that much from one person. I’m shocked and annoyed with you that they just assigned you them without asking you or discussing it whatsoever There are actually church guidelines about how many families should be assigned. I don’t have time to look it up at the moment, but if memory serves it’s about 5. Elder Holland made the point about not overburdening as well. I might point that out because as AT says there is no way one can give proper service to anywhere near that many families especially out here where we live and they don’t all live on our block. And I’d be upfront about being unwilling to even attempt it and probably give a number I would be willing to do (which would be much closer to but also likely less than the above mentioned 5). resist the Jedi mind tricks (as I know you are capable of doing) and avoid attempts at guilting – the line I have used here recently about not being travel agents of guilt comes from a GA. Some people in my ward do have more than 5 on their current lists, but our stake has guidelines in place about those who don’t want or need every month visits. So most of the families on the lists are “quarterly contact” or “annual contact” with contact including a phone call, email, or letter. And active people, like me, who say they don’t need or want a monthly visit can be included in those groups at their request. Even without formal guidelines like our stake has you could just say to some families “I’m not able to make monthly visits but I am available to help you if you need something. I’ll check in with you as often as I can, and that may only happen at church, but don’t be afraid to ask me for something.” (That won’t work with some orthodox families, of course.)
DarkJedi wrote:
There are actually church guidelines about how many families should be assigned. I don’t have time to look it up at the moment, but if memory serves it’s about 5. Elder Holland made the point about not overburdening as well. I might point that out because as AT says there is no way one can give proper service to anywhere near that many families especially out here where we live and they don’t all live on our block. And I’d be upfront about being unwilling to even attempt it and probably give a number I would be willing to do (which would be much closer to but also likely less than the above mentioned 5). resist the Jedi mind tricks (as I know you are capable of doing) and avoid attempts at guilting – the line I have used here recently about not being travel agents of guilt comes from a GA.Some people in my ward do have more than 5 on their current lists, but our stake has guidelines in place about those who don’t want or need every month visits. So most of the families on the lists are “quarterly contact” or “annual contact” with contact including a phone call, email, or letter. And active people, like me, who say they don’t need or want a monthly visit can be included in those groups at their request. Even without formal guidelines like our stake has you could just say to some families “I’m not able to make monthly visits but I am available to help you if you need something. I’ll check in with you as often as I can, and that may only happen at church, but don’t be afraid to ask me for something.” (That won’t work with some orthodox families, of course.)
This above….
I can handle ONE (1) HT family and that is because I want my son to get off the computer and learn something about serving others in the church — in case he wants that form of service for the rest of his life.
I have been a benchwarmer in the church for about 5 years now, and have no desire to run myself ragged, no desire to reinforce, with positive action, this insane way of assigning people to home teaching. And I am very busy leading a non-profit.
The only reason I’m there for this kind of service is for my son. I am sorry if that sounds selfish, but I have not felt completely part of the LDS community for a long time (except for flashes of inclusion on the TEachers Council), and have a very weak desire to reintegrate in this fashion in the future.
When I was HPGL, most of the uncommitted people did nothing. Did not acknowledge email, did not see families, and were evasive about PPI’s. Perhaps that is the approach I should take.
And I am on the plan where if you want someone to do something, you ask them first. And if you want them to do 18 things, you especially take care to ask first.
They obviously didn’t read Elder Holland’s talk, and it wouldn’t surprise me if they are operating from the perspective of judgmentalism about what they think I SHOULD be doing. I need this like I need a hole in the head with what I’m struggling with right now.
Wow, the first time you posted this I thought it would just be a typo…. Not only is it not fair to you, but it’s also not fair to any of these people who you home teach. It’s hypocritical to claim that hometeaching is about fellowship while spreading the effort so thin. Nobody can put forth the emotional effort to connect with 18 people, and people know when they’re just a checkbox.
It’s cliche, but it helps to hear it again: you can’t take care of others until you take care of yourself.
Handbook 2, 7.4.3: Quote:
In some locations, visiting every home each month may not be possible for a time because of insufficient numbers of active priesthood holders or other challenges. In these circumstances, leaders give priority to visiting new members, less-active members who are most likely to respond to invitations to return to Church activity, and members with serious needs.
(I think it’s kind of sad-funny that the handbook talks about this circumstance as if it’s temporary. With increasing inactivity rates, it’s becoming permanent in more places.)
Ask your priesthood leaders to help you chose households that meet priority criteria. Cite scriptures about not running faster than you have strength. If they refuse, escalate.
I’d be far too tempted to walk up to the BPric in the hallway and initiate a conversation with, “This is ridiculous.” They’d then look at each other like, “What’s this guy’s deal?” Then I’d clue them in on the subject. 18 HT families. But it’s not the BP setting the routes is it? It’s probably the EQP or HPGL. I wonder what the average quantity of HT families is for active members in your ward. If they all have 18 families (lol) then… yeah, do the passive aggressive thing that everyone does with HTing. If the leaders making the assignments have 5 families… that would be an issue. I don’t know what leading at church should look like but I’ve always operated under the philosophy of not asking anyone to do something that you wouldn’t be willing to do yourself. I bet 18 HT families falls under that umbrella.
The bishop is supposed to approve all HT assignments. If they’re following policy, he knows. To be a bit serious, this is one of those situations where I would have fully expected a leader to approach me with a facial expression that conveyed discomfort and understanding and saying something like, “I know it’s a lot but we don’t expect you to visit all these people. Just focus on a few of these families.” Even then… 18 families. Why not 40?
nibbler wrote:
To be a bit serious, this is one of those situations where I would have fully expected a leader to approach me with a facial expression that conveyed discomfort and understanding and saying something like, “I know it’s a lot but we don’t expect you to visit all these people. Just focus on a few of these families.”Even then… 18 families. Why not 40?
Let alone the fact that I haven’t been fully active in five years, was maltreated repeatedly by the leadership in the stake and women in the ward when I was serving in a high profile position, and already feel completely disrespected and taken for granted. Now this.
You should see the email I didn’t send in response to this ridiculous decree.
You’d think someone would think to ASK me what I thought. Sheesh.
🙄 🙄 🙄 All because I agreed to ordain my son a teacher??? What a wonderful reward set for stepping up. I could have blocked the thing if I wanted, but I decided to play nice in the sandbox. Now THIS.
I’m curious to know why you think this is directly related to ordaining your son? Could it not be happenstance? I guess I just question the causal relationship. In the BYU devotional today the speaker showed a graph of Nick Nolte movies compared to number of pool drownings annually. Just looking at the lines on the graph it would appear there is be a causal relationship – but we know that’s ridiculous. I’m not trying to downplay anything here, I would be upset at the way this is being handled as well. I agree, I’d think they’d at least ask before assigning me a ridiculous amount of families, or any families for that matter seeing as how I hadn’t done any. FWIW, the passive thing is what is actually working for me. I was assigned one family when I returned to activity 3 years ago, I have never been to see them. I was shortly thereafter assigned another, who I also have never seen (although I do know both these families). BUT, if I was treated as you are I certainly would be knocking on the bishop’s door and probably would have sent the email.
DarkJedi wrote:
I’m curious to know why you think this is directly related to ordaining your son? Could it not be happenstance? I guess I just question the causal relationship. In the BYU devotional today the speaker showed a graph of Nick Nolte movies compared to number of pool drownings annually. Just looking at the lines on the graph it would appear there is be a causal relationship – but we know that’s ridiculous.Reminds me of the story about the kid that finds his Dad making breakfast. Dad says “What do you want for breakfast?”. Son says “Give me some of those FU@#ING pancakes”. Father looks at him in shock, boxes his ears and says “Go to your room and never say that again. Come out when I tell you”.
Father let’s the boy out in 15 minutes and asks again “So, what do you want for breakfast?”. Boy says “I sure as H@ll don’t want any of those FU@#ING pancakes”.
He failed to see the causal relationship between his swearing and his ear boxing. Cuz it’s tough to know what causes what.
Quote:I’m not trying to downplay anything here, I would be upset at the way this is being handled as well. I agree, I’d think they’d at least ask before assigning me a ridiculous amount of families, or any families for that matter seeing as how I hadn’t done any. FWIW, the passive thing is what is actually working for me. I was assigned one family when I returned to activity 3 years ago, I have never been to see them. I was shortly thereafter assigned another, who I also have never seen (although I do know both these families). BUT, if I was treated as you are I certainly would be knocking on the bishop’s door and probably would have sent the email.
I think it’s time they knew my story. The guy who assigned the 18 families, or at least, sent them to me, is the husband of the woman who plunged me into pneumonia and my first bout of clinical depression, and my current commitment crisis 5-6 years ago. They keep at my like I’m some TBM TR-holder and I’m not. I guess I’ve done too good a job of blending in.
It’s one thing to share doubts (a no-no), but where I’m at commitment wise, and why, perhaps that would be a wise talk? I’ve never told them.
I’ve never told anyone my commitment level either. Like you, I think there is a perception that because I’m now active and a high councilor I must be fully committed and all in. The HPGL obviously realizes I’m not and I don’t even get asked about home teaching anymore (I’m actually only assuming I’m assigned to the same families). I think he recognizes I’m not just because I don’t do home teaching (and I don’t expect to be home taught, which I did tell him), I’m frequently looking at my tablet and not always engaged during meetings. etc. I’ve been a member of my ward for nearly 30 years. There are several others who were either here or came shortly after I did who are still here. We get few move ins or converts of any consequence. So one of these guys who was already here is a steadfast orthodox sort, with a bit of llama in him. As I have observed him over the years I’ve noted something – he always accepts any calling,but only does the callings he wants to do. That is, I have seen him accept several callings (and sustained him of course) and never do anything to fulfill the commitment. Honestly it bugs me because I’d rather people just refuse than accept and not do the job – but that’s happened over and over with this guy. The callings he wants to do he has done very well (he seems to like teaching callings).
I agree with you, telling at least some of your history/story to your bishop would probably be beneficial. It’s not at all the same as sharing your doubts or questions, it’s explaining where you’re coming from and why. If you’re willing to do one or two families, say so – that’s one or two families otherwise not being done. And I also don’t think it’s out of order to let him know there are some families you’d rather not work with and even perhaps some families you would like to work with (“If I had these three families I’d do my best to visit every month or at least take care of their needs.”).
I honestly don’t see how any church leader could possibly think it’s OK to assign anyone 18 families and expect regular effective visits. It is humanly not possible, and I think it’s inexcusable. I wouldn’t blame you if you threw the list back at them and told them not only were you not doing those, but just because of this little stunt you wouldn’t do any at all. In the end we’re all volunteers.
I can’t do the thing where I accept a call and do nothing. It’s not me. I feel the weight of the responsibility and its like denying who I am. But I like the rest of what you said. I’m thinking of throwing the list back to the person who sent it to me. I do think this guy, and the Bishop need to know why my commitment level is very low so they stop these annoying decrees, calls to positions for which I have no desire or commitment etcetera.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.