- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
[TL;Dr] [means too long, didn’t read — here is the short version] Not getting support from local leaders on minimal info needed to do my calling. Discussion and possible solutions.So, some of you know that I have issues with a few things in the church.
One is the high standards of behavior required of members to be in good standing, contrasted with mostly mediocre programs and low commitment from the majority of the members in the wards in which I have served. Yes, there are highly committed people, and highly committed Wards, but the majority in which I have lived are not that way. I know that blunt statements like sentence #2 above are not normally considered balanced or professional, but I am being honest in my experience and feelings. They do represent my lived experience.
I have learned, over the years, to reduce my expectations to almost nothing, while simultaneously reducing my own commitment accordingly. It’s easier for me to be a low-commitment member in a low-commitment environment than it is to be a high commitment member in a low commitment environment. It’s been a key aspect of staying LDS for me.
As evidence I was mastering mediocrity, I literally forgot to do one of my teacher council’s recently (unintentional). No one noticed except a Bishopric member who asked if it was in a particular room on the day it should be held. I just said I forgot and that was no problem. No one else mentioned it, not the SS President, not the other leaders who presumably direct it through the Ward council, none of the teachers. None of the teachers were asking me about it, as there had been no communication to anyone about it.
I got on it the next week to promote the next scheduled council, two weeks later, but found LDS.org wasn’t up to date and I didn’t know who the teachers were any more — much had changed.
The SS President never answers me when I write to him about such things. I scheduled the council dates directly with the Bishop since the SS president didn’t answer any of the questions I had about it, or respond to the proposed dates. SS President was also addressed on the email but didn’t answer. Bishop answered and agreed to dates.
So, this time, in order to promote the next scheduled council effectively, I wrote to the Bishop’s counselor over SS and also addressed the SS President asking about who the teachers were. No one answered. At church, I hunted down the Bishop’s counselor since the SS President wasn’t present. I asked who the teachers are at this time. The Bp’s counselor was more concerned that I wasn’t following the chain of command and asking the SS President that question. I indicated he wasn’t there that Sunday, and it was just a routine question. Also indicated the SS President never answers me. Councilor indicated he’d been busy the last couple weeks (SS President) so maybe that’s why. I said he never answers me, not for the last year. After some cat and mouse on why I was even asking the Bpric member who the teachers were, he finally told me who all the teachers are.
As I spoke to the Bishop’s Councilor I had a flashback, at one point, when I was on a camping trip with a long-time camper and former boy scout. We built a fire and I mentioned that perhaps he had placed the wood incorrectly. This camper (an adult my age, and a good friend) said “You’re telling ME how to light a fire??”. He wasn’t angry about it, but it was a good way of reminding me he wasn’t a beginner and perhaps I was out of line.
As a Ph.D. holder in business management, teacher of business management of a quarter century full time, with multiple Master’s degrees in those areas, I felt like saying “You’re telling
ME, how to follow a simple chain of command??”. It wasn’t an arrogant thought, although I guess it sounds a bit like it. It was just the thought that struck me as very odd given my background, of which this Bishop’s Counselor knows. Kind of like how you might feel if someone starting telling you what the various controls on your personal automobile do — something you take for granted. Of course all these textbook chains of commands and policies are
idealsin non-profits. But when people don’t function, or you have limited resources, OF COURSE lines of authority are sometimes not followed. Ward clerks’ start organizing home teaching blitz’ and all kinds of other anomalies — I have seen them many times before. Sometimes you just have to do what is necessary to get the job done. And this means working with whoever is willing or available. I guess I felt a little flabbergasted this councilor felt he had to school me in the chain of command when he must know the SS President’s commitment is weak since he’s over that area. Here is the frustration here — one, putting the chain of command ahead of answering my questions on such a small issue of this. And the biggest one — the way members and leaders are so nice and accommodating to people they think they might reactivate. But when they think they have your commitment, you get indifference, lack of support, and in this case, stymying my efforts, at first, to get the names of the teachers so I can do my calling due to “process”. A calling which, apparently, isn’t something anyone really cares about happening anyway, based on how no one but this councilor seemed to notice when I forgot to hold it.
When we returned to our Ward after attending a different one for a few years due to my daughter’s bullying, everyone was so nice. They would announce the teacher’s council over the pulpit in sacrament to help me promote it. They chatted us up. That stopped. All the leaders were so appreciative of the councils and the effort I put into it. That dried up after they saw I was into it for a couple months in a row. The Bishop at the time would pay the piano player in my jazz band a low rate to perform at ward socials and the rest of us Mormon musicians would play for free. The new Bishop, who I’ve known for years, refuses that. I normally don’t go to the socials anymore as I find them boring otherwise. If I’m doing something meaningful, fine.
Anyway, how easily we take our people for granted after we think we have their commitment. How easily we revert to the ideal process even when our leaders don’t function properly.
It left a bad taste in my mouth…not a big deal, I guess, but an impression I felt like sharing.
I am still doing the council and promoted it to all the teachers. Otherwise, it wouldn’t happen. After it’s over, I’ll recede back into the background.
My wife is very organized. She and I serve as co-bear den leaders. She sends out a monthly email to the parents of our bear den to let them know upcoming dates and projects. Our cub master is basically incompetant. He is a nice guy but he just does not have the skills to be in a leadership position.
As an aside, It seems to me that the dependable leaders in the cub scout program keep getting poached for ward leadership. The cub scout program is shared by 3 wards. If you have a dependable and competant individual it is only natural that you might tap that person to do some of the heavy lifting in your ward and expect the other two wards to pick up the slack in cub scouts. But nobody really does pick up the slack and it is contant disfunction. I really wish we would get women called to these positions (cub master, cub scout leaders) given the high demand for competent males in our church but nobody asks me.
Anyway, back to my main point, my wife will sometimes get calls, texts, or emails from parents of kids that are not in our bear den asking about scout activities. Has scouts been cancelled due to wheather? When and where is the next pack meeting.
This puts DW in a difficult position. She does not want to be everyone’s point of contact for information for 2 main reasons 1) The cub scout program is aweful and she does not want to be the face of a program that she has no control over. 2) Sometimes there are last minute changes or even contradictory messages being sent. She does not want to be responsible for giving people the wrong information.
Long story short, sometimes an individual may redirect a person back to the rather disfunctional chain of command because as frustrating as working through the chain of command may be – once a “work around” becomes established the less competant individuals shirk more and more of the work load until they basically do nothing.
Roy wrote:
Long story short, sometimes an individual may redirect a person back to the rather disfunctional chain of command because as frustrating as working through the chain of command may be – once a “work around” becomes established the less competant individuals shirk more and more of the work load until they basically do nothing.
That might have been his motivation, but I didn’t take it that way. Thankful for the alternate perspective though. I’d rather he just gave me what I wanted since I’d been floundering in my calling somewhat recently anyway. And I’ve never asked him for anything else except on this issue.
Creating obstacles over a simple thing like that when we were face to face at church seemed a bit extreme and unwelcome.
And then, there is the valuation (by leaders), accommodation (by leaders), indifference (by leaders) and then less activity (by members) cycle at play. Had I been only coming out of less activity he probably would have fallen over himself to give me the names.
SilentDawning wrote:
And then, there is the valuation (by leaders), accommodation (by leaders), indifference (by leaders) and then less activity (by members) cycle at play. Had I been only coming out of less activity he probably would have fallen over himself to give me the names.
No disagreement there.
I feel that I have been reasonably successful in walking the line. I am close enough to the exit that leaders are glad for my continued participation.
My son with mild autism was ordained as a deacon last month. I have taken him early to church the last 3 weeks to review and practice the plan for passing the sacrament. The YM leader sent me a text thanking me for being supportive. It felt a little odd being thanked for helping my own kid but it is the thought that counts and I will take all the good will I can get.
SilentDawning wrote:
At church, I hunted down the Bishop’s councilor since the SS President wasn’t present. I asked who the teachers are at this time. The Bp’s councilor was more concerned that I wasn’t following the chain of command and asking the SS President that question.
That right there is weird. Very strange. Chain of command? If we’re caring about chains of commands at church we’re starting to lose our way. If we have to cite chain of command to answer simple questions at church we’re starting to lose our way.
FWIW when I go to my ward’s online directory I can see who all the teachers are under Ward Leaders > Sunday School.
nibbler wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
At church, I hunted down the Bishop’s councilor since the SS President wasn’t present. I asked who the teachers are at this time. The Bp’s councilor was more concerned that I wasn’t following the chain of command and asking the SS President that question.
That right there is weird. Very strange. Chain of command? If we’re caring about chains of commands at church we’re starting to lose our way. If we have to cite chain of command to answer simple questions at church we’re starting to lose our way.
FWIW when I go to my ward’s online directory I can see who all the teachers are under Ward Leaders > Sunday School.
It didn’t appear to be up to date. So, asking the counselor was my last resort since the SS President doesn’t answer me.
Roy wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
And then, there is the valuation (by leaders), accommodation (by leaders), indifference (by leaders) and then less activity (by members) cycle at play. Had I been only coming out of less activity he probably would have fallen over himself to give me the names.
No disagreement there.
I feel that I have been reasonably successful in walking the line. I am close enough to the exit that leaders are glad for my continued participation.
My son with mild autism was ordained as a deacon last month. I have taken him early to church the last 3 weeks to review and practice the plan for passing the sacrament. The YM leader sent me a text thanking me for being supportive. It felt a little odd being thanked for helping my own kid but it is the thought that counts and I will take all the good will I can get.
Isn’t it strange that in order to get kindness, appreciation and support, you have to be on the fringes? Shouldn’t these things be part of any leadership arsenal? And when commitment is shown by highly committed people, shouldn’t we be DEEPLY appreciated given how rare and important such commitment is to the success of our wards?
And its not like the people leading us aren’t experienced or talented enough in these ways sometimes either. And they do undergo training. My SS president is a lawyer, former EQ president for a long time. Bishop was a manager until retirement.
Anyway, just a little fed up with it all right now. I feel darned frustrated with how hard it is to serve in our church. So glad they don’t have my commitment anymore. They don’t deserve it.
Gonna plough ahead though. I see this low stress, once in a while calling as the best thing for me now, and I don’t want to “do nothing”.
For everyone’s visuals. To make this more positive, I guess the way to cope is to simply continue embracing mediocrity as your highest expectation from leaders. Throw out expectatons for even basic leadership theory and principles, and do your best. Basic leadership theory meaning that the leaders support initiatives consistent with their mission and annual planning.
Another strategy is to stay as close to the fringe as possible so at least you keep the leaders in the accommodation phase of the cycle. But I find that a bit manipulative. I guess I have shown too much commitment, to the point they are indifferent.
[attachment=0]The Indifference Cycle.PNG[/attachment] … So to sum up: We tend to pay much more attention to things we view as being urgent, off, wrong, or deviating from the status quo. And we tend to overlook or take for granted things which seem normal, consistent, and in-line with the status quo. This sounds like a human nature thing, rather than a Church issue. And I’m not even sure it’s something we should correct. There’s only so much we can focus on, and giving our attention to one thing, takes it away from another. It makes sense to focus on the “troublesome” areas. But the unfortunate result, is that it’s often hard to get the attention of others without becoming a “troublesome area” yourself. I reminded me of the parable of the prodigal son. Bringing back the prodigal son lead to celebration. But it also made the faithful son feel under appreciated and left out.
dande48 wrote:
… So to sum up: We tend to pay much more attention to things we view as being urgent, off, wrong, or deviating from the status quo. And we tend to overlook or take for granted things which seem normal, consistent, and in-line with the status quo.This sounds like a human nature thing, rather than a Church issue.
And I’m not even sure it’s something we should correct. There’s only so much we can focus on, and giving our attention to one thing, takes it away from another. It makes sense to focus on the “troublesome” areas. But the unfortunate result, is that it’s often hard to get the attention of others without becoming a “troublesome area” yourself. I reminded me of the parable of the prodigal son. Bringing back the prodigal son lead to celebration. But it also made the faithful son feel under appreciated and left out.
I actually disagree — passionately, with the part in bold. First, it’s easier to keep committed people than to reel them back in again after they leave. Second, having GOOD PROGRAMS is what I believe keeps people and attracts them to the church. No one wants to feel they are part of a losing team. They want to work with others who are reliable, do a good job, etcetera. The resulting culture of excellence feeds off itself. That is why everyone wants to work for Apple, Google, Proctor & Gamble and other high performing organizations. Third, focusing on the people who are walking out the door is draining and hard on the committed membership. Strengthening the committed is easier and more rewarding, with clear benefits and commitment continuing from the members being supported. Fourth, good programs, well executed with the people who implement them supported, creates a great experience for new members and people who come out of less activity. Something we have an obligation to deliver if we truly are the only true church on the face of the earth.
What you are focusing on is leadership by exception and the urgency addiction (focusing on urgent items rather than long-term issues that are not currently urgent, but which build a strong organization).
In my situation, I’m well-educated, work hard, have skills to share borne from 25 years of full time teaching experience both in and out of the church, professionally. I can speak, develop materials, have drive to promote and can deliver a quality experience for the teacher’s council. My councils are highly regarded by really good people in the church — when I hold them. I may not be good at a lot of things in life, but at least this area is my life’s work, so I HAVE to possess something of value.
And yet, their behavior alienates me due to sheer mediocrity and lack of support.
And it’s not the first time. I have seen this over and over and over again. I think I even participated in this cycle as a leader with a few people due to simply taking commitment for granted. But most of the time, I was supportive and worked hard to support leaders.
I have participated at some other churches where they have volunteer appreciation dinners and/or appreciation cards with gift cards as a thank you gift. Paid staff know that they depend on a small army of volunteers to deliver a quality product. Volunteers are a resource to be nurtured.
Our church has a different model. 1) There are no paid staff. Who would be in charge of the appreciation? The bishop? Perhaps the most overworked volunteer of all? 2) Our theology and culture has us promising obedience, covenanting and consecrating all of our time and resources. We basically feel that our commitment is owed to the church and that to withhold it (outside of some fairly reasonable exceptions) is to be deficient and delinquent.
We have high expectations of our members. OTOH because we recognize that many of our volunteers are drafted into positions where they may have no skills or interest, we also deal with a good percentage of mediocrity. At the end of the day the “magnify your calling” people get the same vote of thanks as the “phone it in” people.
SilentDawning wrote:
To make this more positive, I guess the way to cope is to simply continue embracing mediocrity as your highest expectation from leaders. [snip] Gonna plough ahead though. I see this low stress, once in a while calling as the best thing for me now, and I don’t want to “do nothing”.
Yes, I believe to have a calling is a social marker of being a member in good standing. This is helpful to be seen and accepted as a member of the tribe. My StayLDS strategy has been to reduce my church input to a point that I feel is sustainable perpetually without resentment or bitterness on my part. Therefore to find a calling where one feels reasonably competent, that is not terribly time intensive, and does not require teaching things that one may no longer believe is very helpful and can provide a StayLDS solution for many years. I am co-bear den cub scout leader with my wife. We have been in this calling for several years and at this point we are recycling old lesson plans and activity schedules. We are repeating the same stuff with new groups of kids. Also since my kids are now in MIA / Mutual, we would be going to and from the church anyway on Wednesday nights. Outside of an occasional parent thanking us for providing a quality bear den experience (we sometimes take the wolves too when the that den leader does a no show and we have another boy that has asked not to move up to Webelos because he does not want to leave our den) there is no recognition or gratitude for our continued service and productivity.I guess one could describe my current calling as a “placeholder” or “bridge” calling. It is a low key calling that allows me my “hold my place” or “keep my foot in the door” of church activity. It is a “bridge” between where I am now and where I may choose to be in the future in my relationship with the church.
Roy wrote:Our church has a different model. 1) There are no paid staff. Who would be in charge of the appreciation? The bishop? Perhaps the most overworked volunteer of all? 2) Our theology and culture has us promising obedience, covenanting and consecrating all of our time and resources. We basically feel that our commitment is owed to the church and that to withhold it (outside of some fairly reasonable exceptions) is to be deficient and delinquent.SilentDawning wrote:
To make this more positive, I guess the way to cope is to simply continue embracing mediocrity as your highest expectation from leaders. [snip] Gonna plough ahead though. I see this low stress, once in a while calling as the best thing for me now, and I don’t want to “do nothing”.
Yes, I believe to have a calling is a social marker of being a member in good standing. This is helpful to be seen and accepted as a member of the tribe. My StayLDS strategy has been to reduce my church input to a point that I feel is sustainable perpetually without resentment or bitterness on my part. Therefore to find a calling where one feels reasonably competent, that is not terribly time intensive, and does not require teaching things that one may no longer believe is very helpful and can provide a StayLDS solution for many years. I am co-bear den cub scout leader with my wife. We have been in this calling for several years and at this point we are recycling old lesson plans and activity schedules. We are repeating the same stuff with new groups of kids. Also since my kids are now in MIA / Mutual, we would be going to and from the church anyway on Wednesday nights. Outside of an occasional parent thanking us for providing a quality bear den experience (we sometimes take the wolves too when the that den leader does a no show and we have another boy that has asked not to move up to Webelos because he does not want to leave our den) there is no recognition or gratitude for our continued service and productivity.I guess one could describe my current calling as a “placeholder” or “bridge” calling. It is a low key calling that allows me my “hold my place” or “keep my foot in the door” of church activity. It is a “bridge” between where I am now and where I may choose to be in the future in my relationship with the church.
Couple things. I can’t go much lower in my commitment. If I get released then I’m going to be drafted to do something I don’t want, and this is the only thing that floats my boat right now.
Regarding the part in bold…
That needs to change. Even interpersonal appreciation and support on operational issues is a sign of appreciation. I once bought a Kindle book when I was figuring out how to work with volunteers in my non-profit. I was expecting to learn about rewards programs and other forms of extrinsic reward. To my surprise, the entire book was dedicating to respecting volunteers time, providing a positive experience, being organized, giving support and provapp0iding proper training. All these were considered intrinsic, free kinds of appreciation that show respect for the person’s commitment.
To say we owe the Church everything the church owes us nothing is a misnomer. Volunteerism is a two-way street. It is a reciprocal relationship. Now, the church can’t outright say that, or everyone will turn to the church, creating more work than volunteers can handle. But the church does have an obligation to return a certain amount of value to its members. An uplifting experience on Sunday, safe programs that add value to a person’s life.
I’m reminded of Willard Harley Junior in his book His Needs, Her Needs. He commented on how he felt it was deeply unfair that in certain marriage, partner A would meet the needs partner B, while partner A’s needs went unmet. It can’t be a “one-way flow” of commitment and value.
Like you, I now look at my involvement as a “social marker” and a “foot in the door” while I seek fulfilment elsewhere.
SilentDawning wrote:
One is the high standards of behavior required of members to be in good standing, contrasted with mostly mediocre programs and low commitment from the majority of the members in the wards in which I have served.I think this would be more correct to say…”perceived high standards…”
Or perhaps…”one can be made to feel high standards of behavior are required…”
There really is nothing at church required of anyone. It is a volunteer organization. Everyone gives to it what they feel they can give.
Different behaviors or commitment levels may result in different responses by others of the tribe…but that is just consequence, not requirements.
The Lord pays everyone in the vineyard the same wage, whether you work all day or just one hour. Some may think that unfair…but they don’t get what the Lord is trying to do.
Nothing at church is required. Choose what you wish to give, and find peace with yourself. Seek to be more committed if the rewards of those labors bring you what you want. Those that do that have their reward.
Cut back on commitment if the programs are mediocre or lacking. They will be fine without you.
Say no to any calling you don’t want. And aspire to none.
Church is just a group of people trying to do good. No more, no less.
Heber13 wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
One is the high standards of behavior required of members to be in good standing, contrasted with mostly mediocre programs and low commitment from the majority of the members in the wards in which I have served.I think this would be more correct to say…”perceived high standards…”
Uh…heber — to be in good standing we have to pay 10% of our income or we are not in good standing. Nor are we allowed to see loved ones get married (I know as I’m one who didn’t). We make expansive covenants regarding our wealth that we have now, or may possess in the future, and how we use our time.
And that’s just the temple.
Regarding everyone just giving what they can give, and the leadership being cool with it — we have The Unwritten Order of things, the culture, negative reactions from leaders and ostracization if you bail on a calling or refuse. I know this first hand because it’s all happened to me. And I had someone in the PEC and Ward council that told me there is ample negativity toward me personally shared in those meetings. And I was even serving in a calling at the time.
People are called and expected to assume an unpaid full time job (Bishop, SP) while maintaining their career in most cases
So, with respect, I don’t buy much of what you just said.
Legally, we are a volunteer organization, in actuality, the church demands a lot from its members — quite a bit more than I have seen in any other volunteer organization.
And I respect your views and can see how you reach that through your experience. But what you said is not true. Much of what you said is conflated with your emotion from your painful experiences, and I might add…is a very valid conclusion to come to. But it is not true for everyone and a person could be holding them self back from accepting church for what it is if clinging to one emotional response vs opening up to all possible choices in navigating Mormonism.
By this…I don’t mean to say I know something you don’t, or that I’m right and you’re wrong.
Only what you said is not true.
How do I know?
Because I don’t pay 10% tithing on my gross paycheck.
I don’t make expansive covenants about my wealth I have now or in the future or how I spend my time.
I give what I choose to give and my Bishop is cool with it. I have not been ostracized.
I currently have no calling and the bishop saw me last week and shook my hand and apologized to me that since they dissolved the high priest group leadership I was serving in, I have been without a calling but they have something in mind for me. I simply told him that no apology is necessary, and to take all the time in the world because I don’t need a calling. I wanted him to know where I stand…I’m good…I’m not one to need a calling to feel good about myself. So the pressure is off him to include me. I reiterate…I’m not ostracized. I’m not offended. I’m not in church to get their approval. I go for my reasons. And I often choose to skip…a few weeks ago skipped and took my son skiing and we had some great talks about God on the chairlift. Then we went to church last week…and everything was just fine.
I have a TR and have seen every one of my kids married in the temple. I’ve got 2 more to go. I may or may not see them married in the temple…it depends on my choices. I know the church rules…so I will make choices if I want to be in the temple or not.
My SP is a surgeon and a great guy. He serves willingly in addition to his full time job. He does not view it as an obligation. I have no calling and the church doesn’t demand anything more of me. We just choose differently how much time we sacrifice to the church.
So…if you read your post…and you read my post…how can we both be talking about the same church?
If I made it sound like you can do whatever you want with no consequences…then I wasn’t clear. No murderer can expect to walk into a bishop office and demand a TR. And no Bishop can walk into my home and demand I give more than I am giving. Both extreme examples are wrong.
The church has rules. You follow them or you don’t.
They don’t demand you to do anything. They invite…and you make your choices and live with consequences. And there is a TON of wiggle room in how you define it for various circumstances.
But if you don’t pay any tithing…you can’t blame them for demanding you make expansive covenants on your wealth, nobody demands that. But you can characterize it that way if you want to view it that way. It doesn’t make it true.
Tithing is between you and the Lord and you need to pay what you define is your 10%. They cannot demand you define it only one way. I defined it for me to feel honest. I ran it by nibbler…he knows how I interpret things. He gave me good advice. The bishop asked if I was a full tithe payer…I said yes. Done. No demands, just my choices.
But if you feel more honest to define it only by one definition, that is your choice. And you should follow your heart and feel good you are able to decline a temple recommend and feel proud of yourself and your integrity as you sit outside the temple and wait to welcome your children as they come out of the temple. That is an ok choice too. Nobody is making you do that. And when my sister did that and waited outside the temple …her son went straight to her and gave her a big hug and they went to the reception and everything was good.
The church doesn’t make you do anything. You choose to navigate within the rules that are setup. You accept consequences. And there is not one way to do it.
My indifference cycle is…I choose to seek God…I go to church with my family…leaders and Ward members do their thing…and I’m indifferent to it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.