- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am going to minister to those who enter my sphere of influence that I can minister to. I just figured that the church organization would like to get an accurate understanding of what is going on. They will know that the people I watch over are ministered to.
In the situation of my family, it will actually work a lot better if another family ministers to us – some families already do as a matter of fact. The ministering relationships are not going to happen for my husband unless the ministering comes organically family-to-family. Going up and cold-calling people is not my husband’s thing. Being cold-called on is even less of my husband’s thing. If the church organization is not flexible enough to accept this reality, that is their problem, their loss… and mine in a small fashion.
We have very good, progressive ward leadership and an orthodox but caring Stake President. Inlike the direction it is taking in our area. One thing that stood out in our training over the weekend was that we are moving away from a scripted, checklist approach.
Another thing I mentioned is that the former focus was on the Home/Visiting Teacher (“Did YOU do YOUR HT/VT.”), while the new focus is on the person receiving the ministering (“Tell me about __________.”). That is a significant change, imo.
nibbler wrote:
I’m not sure how to feel. During this most recent general conference and during his trip to Kenya, Nelson placed a lot of focus on people seeking and receiving their own revelation. Here we have this new program, a chance for a fresh start,but no one wants to take any chances and do something different.We either default to what was done before or twiddle our thumbs until a general authority tells us what we should be doing. Maybe it’s a fruit of being overly correlated. No one wants to suggest something that the leaders wouldn’t approve of because *flush* goes the social capital.
That is a bit how I feel. I am the classic visionary and ideator, yet I’m having trouble figuring out what to do because we’ve been scripted for so long. It’s like those movies where people have been denied their freedom on some level. A hero comes in and liberates them, and then the movie ends with the liberated staring out across a major landscape trying to figure out what to do. They have no idea. Almost like Seligman’s learned helplessness, but without the punishment factor.
These are the “fruits” of decades of disempowerment.
I will be interested in seeing the training — our HPGL just laid the guilt trip on us again, and basically nullified any new enthusiasm he could have harnessed from from the newness of a program that hasn’t changed in decades. I don’t attend as often anymore, so I don’t feel its my place to talk to him about his gross error. “You know, this guy has spotty church attendance and then shows up criticizing my leadership like he knows everything”. Gotta avoid that.
When did home teaching first start anyway? I know it’s been around since 1982 or so, because it was in place when I started my first exposures to the church around that time.
SilentDawning wrote:
When did home teaching first start anyway?
From what I have read it started in the Mormon Reformation period of 1856-7. “Reformation” here means that the saints were asked to reform their own lives to better follow the gospel. In my mind, The LDS church during those few years went through a sort of theocratic police state crackdown (in rhetoric and feel if not in actual practice). Two home or ward missionaries were assigned to each ward. I perceive these gentleman as a sort of deputized representatives of church leadership. They were to be the eyes and ears, to gauge gospel commitment in each home (by conducting fairly probing worthiness interviews), to encourage repentance/recommitment to even greater obedience, to invite rebaptism as a symbol of that recommitment (under possible threat of excommunication), and report back. Not surprisingly almost nobody refused rebaptism.
Here is a (IMO Pollyanna) description from LDSLiving:
http://www.ldsliving.com/Could-You-Pass-this-1857-Home-Teaching-Interview/s/80185 Quote:In the early years of the Church in the Salt Lake Valley, a “home missionary” program was started to help motivate the Saints, who were becoming increasingly apathetic in their faith. After attempts to persuade and plead with the members failed, Church leaders called “teachers” to visit homes to help stir members to repentance.
from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Reformation Quote:leaders at church headquarters then established a policy of assigning two “home” or ward missionaries in each congregational unit. They were asked to visit each family in the ward, assess their material needs and provide help where possible. They were also asked to inquire into family members’ spiritual commitment, including asking searching questions about religious practices. After some months of these missionary visits, Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City and surrounding communities who had not yet been rebaptized were asked to do so as an expression of their ongoing commitment to the church. Paul H. Peterson asserts that those who refused to be rebaptized might “lose their membership in the Church
This same Mormon Reformation period gave us the MMM and also BY’s musings on blood atonement. IMO it was a very scary time to be in the Utah territory as a less than straight arrow Mormon.
Old Timer wrote:
We have very good, progressive ward leadership and an orthodox but caring Stake President. Inlike the direction it is taking in our area.One thing that stood out in our training over the weekend was that we are moving away from a scripted, checklist approach.
Another thing I mentioned is that the former focus was on the Home/Visiting Teacher (“Did YOU do YOUR HT/VT.”), while the new focus is on the person receiving the ministering (“Tell me about __________.”). That is a significant change, imo.
We’ve been supposed to be doing this for a couple years. The question that was supposed to be asked was “what do your families need?” or “How is your assigned person?” as opposed to “Did you visit?” In my ward I was only ever asked the latter question, though (subpar HPGL assistant). I do know that others we asked the “better” questions in my ward and in other wards. And interestingly I was visiting another ward in March right before the announcement and overheard a conversation involving the RSP about this “new” question and how excited she was – even though neither she nor the question were actually new.
We are asking for a culture change involving ministering and there will be bumps and resistance. Old school in the church was more Borg-like (“Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.”). I’m sensing new school thinking is not the same and is more like “Let’s figure out together how to make this vision work.” (without numbers and checkboxes)
So while the change hasn’t been as significant to me, it is still a change and it is a bigger change for the vast majority.
I see its roots in the colonization of Deseret… in a much more non-threatening way. Many of the members became farmers in remote areas, and having home teachers promoted community between these remote outposts so they got to know each other and also meant that help could be requested if needed. Roy wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
When did home teaching first start anyway?
From what I have read it started in the Mormon Reformation period of 1856-7. “Reformation” here means that the saints were asked to reform their own lives to better follow the gospel. In my mind, The LDS church during those few years went through a sort of theocratic police state crackdown (in rhetoric and feel if not in actual practice). Two home or ward missionaries were assigned to each ward. I perceive these gentleman as a sort of deputized representatives of church leadership. They were to be the eyes and ears, to gauge gospel commitment in each home (by conducting fairly probing worthiness interviews), to encourage repentance/recommitment to even greater obedience, to invite rebaptism as a symbol of that recommitment (under possible threat of excommunication), and report back. Not surprisingly almost nobody refused rebaptism.
Here is a (IMO Pollyanna) description from LDSLiving:
http://www.ldsliving.com/Could-You-Pass-this-1857-Home-Teaching-Interview/s/80185 Quote:In the early years of the Church in the Salt Lake Valley, a “home missionary” program was started to help motivate the Saints, who were becoming increasingly apathetic in their faith. After attempts to persuade and plead with the members failed, Church leaders called “teachers” to visit homes to help stir members to repentance.
from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Reformation Quote:leaders at church headquarters then established a policy of assigning two “home” or ward missionaries in each congregational unit. They were asked to visit each family in the ward, assess their material needs and provide help where possible. They were also asked to inquire into family members’ spiritual commitment, including asking searching questions about religious practices. After some months of these missionary visits, Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City and surrounding communities who had not yet been rebaptized were asked to do so as an expression of their ongoing commitment to the church. Paul H. Peterson asserts that those who refused to be rebaptized might “lose their membership in the Church
This same Mormon Reformation period gave us the MMM and also BY’s musings on blood atonement. IMO it was a very scary time to be in the Utah territory as a less than straight arrow Mormon.
Great research!!! Sounds like the “watchman in Israel” but from a surveillance perspective!!!
Thanks to Roy for posting on the beginnings of home teaching, or ministering as it is now called. Helps me put things in perspective. I have great difficulty with pushing things on people. And with visiting people because of assignment. I remember the sinking feeling in my heart when I heard that Ward teaching was going to be renamed Home teaching. I did not like going ward teaching with my stepdad – no reflection on him, he did a nice job – and had hoped that the practice would wither away. The new name told me it was not to be. However, with this new change, I think I see the way to just opt out. Oh I may respond to personal requests, and visit out of pure respect and concern for someone, but if so, it will be with the agreement and accompaniment of DW. The idea of lining up a partner and then making an appointment with unwilling strangers and then coordinating with the partner is just not in the cards for me anymore. They are making the ministering the focus of EVERY fifth Sunday this year in our Ward. Talk about a bad movie preview. It’s a reason to skip it. And they want us to report on the families as well. Which, sounds like home teaching again.
I maintain again, that the effort is better placed in making the Sunday experience and programs good rather than chasing after people who don’t want to be chased, and where results are minimal at best.
Ho hum.
Fwiw, we are having excellent discussions and planning actual, needed service in our meetings. We didn’t do ministering in our fifth Sunday, but it is the topic for this half of the year for fourth Sunday. Like Curt, our ward has begun to make some progress in real meaningful service. I really came here to link this article which I really like and which I think asnwers the original question. It’s on the landing page at LDS.org right now. I love the graphic, and I think President Bigham does a great job at concisely and clearly stating what ministering as opposed to HT/VT is about. Interesting side note (to me anyway) is that the article is dated Dec. 2018 – a little Christmas in July?
https://www.lds.org/ensign/2018/12/where-did-my-home-and-visiting-teachers-go?lang=eng&_r=1&cid=HP_WE-25-7-2018_dPTH_fLHNA_xLIDyL2_ ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.lds.org/ensign/2018/12/where-did-my-home-and-visiting-teachers-go?lang=eng&_r=1&cid=HP_WE-25-7-2018_dPTH_fLHNA_xLIDyL2_ Recently my wife & I visited members from our ward who moved into a different nursing home in the next ward. My wife was her VT & I was the HT. We aren’t going to stop visiting them because they are outside of the ward boundary. Do we really care that our visit is measured
or not? In this case no. It still fulfills the spirit of “ministering” and we like to see them. If I were a Bishop or a SP the answer may be different.
I have never aspired to either position.
IMO: this is similar to a legal principle: the letter of the law verses the spirit of the law.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.