- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SilentDawning wrote:bridget_night wrote:
This is true, but what gets me is the utter lack of resources given to people so they can learn to do it well. The same applies to teaching. 90% of what we do on Sunday involves teaching or speaking, yet there is not formal system for improving that aspect of the experience. We did have a teacher improvement coordinator at one time (I did that calling) but that position disappeared. Plus I found few people were interested in getting feedback. Only the really good teachers were interested in improving.I would like to see an online course with videos on LDS.org on how to do it, or perhaps ongoing lessons sponsored by the Stake that people can just sign up for and attend that teach them how to speak better.
.
I so agree SD. I was one of those good teachers yet I felt muzzled all the time because I could not use any outside quotes like the GA’s do all the time. I like the idea of videos.
Old-Timer wrote:The resources are there. They aren’t used. That’s a failure of local leadership.
What if we took some of these tithing dollars and invested them in some kind of paid specialists that were respoonsible for improving the quality of our Church experience? Would that be so incredibly bad. I know some will cry “Priestcraft” but I’m not talking about paid Bishops and priesthood — I’m talking about people who will take the job of improving the programs seriously. This volunteerism, while wonderful for cash cowism at the local level, leads to highly unpredictable results — and often, substandard in the wards I’ve attended in the “mission field” — eastern America and central Canada.
Quote:What if we took some of these tithing dollars and invested them in some kind of paid specialists that were responsible for improving the quality of our Church experience? Would that be so incredibly bad.
Yes, I think it would be – at least at the local level. I would rather rely on local leadership to do what they are supposed to do, realizing how often it doesn’t happen and dealing with the frustration.
One of our speakers today let slip some rare candor. Regarding giving a talk, he said the best things about it are 1) it’s over in 20 minutes and 2) you don’t have to listen. Old-Timer wrote:Quote:I would rather rely on local leadership to do what they are supposed to do, realizing how often it doesn’t happen and dealing with the frustration.
Why?
I like the charity angle others mentioned. But yeah, it can get pretty boring sometimes. Not sure what to do about children except we used to let our bring a book or have paper and pencils to draw with. I try to keep in mind it is a good opportunity for others to share their views in the form of a talk/sermon. If there wasn’t an audience, there wouldn’t be a reason to give a talk. My kid’s holiday presentations (band, chorus, etc.) or awards meetings are boring too sometimes. But I still go to those because I love my children and want to support them. I guess sometimes I try to think of it that way in SM. They’re good people trying to share what they thought was important about a topic. Quote:Ray: I would rather rely on local leadership to do what they are supposed to do, realizing how often it doesn’t happen and dealing with the frustration.
SD: Why?
I have seen too much of the cult of personality (in many organizations, including the LDS Church) to want to invest in something that probably would result in its expansion – OR establish even more deeply a conservative, traditional outlook.
I see the perspective of the “professional” being promulgated throughout the local units – OR the perspective of the Bishop or Stake President who oversees the payment process. I don’t like that probable outcome.
Personally, I don’t see a paid professional, like a Youth Activities Leader, for example having this kind of cult-ish impact, or entrenching conservatism — what I see is a published calendar, activities that people WANT to come to, and meaningful perseonal leadership and other development activities for the youth, for example. As I’ve said before, in my Ward, and several others, there is a lack of youth leadership development. I spoke to both the YW President and my daughter’s advisor about some kind of leadership training for her — as simple as helping her put together a calendar with buy-in from the YW class, and having her do the organization. I offered to help in any way required — six months later –nothing. I followed up again and got a promise that this would happen…but I’m pretty sure if I didn’t push and keep pressing, nothing woudl happen.
I’m at the point now that if nothing happens, I’m just going to help her plan parties and events, and projects for her beehive group as non-Church events so she can get the training she wants. We will bill it as a non-Church activity and we will activate the organization strength she keeps displaying.
Perhaps I’m overzealous having been a YM president three times and a Stake Young Men’s president for a long time as well. I still believe that with all the resources we sink into the Church, having decent programs consistently is not an unrealistic expectation, though.
doug wrote:One of our speakers today let slip some rare candor. Regarding giving a talk, he said the best things about it are 1) it’s over in 20 minutes and 2) you don’t have to listen.
Nice!:thumbup: I like the idea of lay membership stretching their talents to prepare talks and deliver as best they can, and the mentality of everyone in the congregation is that we all try our best and don’t have to be professionals to participate. It seems to engage me more.
But it wouldn’t be a bad idea to try to book CES speakers regularly for sacrament meetings, rather than having them be EFY or Firesides or other evening special meeting speakers. Bring them into the Sacrament meetings. I find they are usually pretty polished speakers, and I don’t want to have to attend another meeting to listen to them.
SD, where does it end? Who gets paid and who doesn’t – and how would one be justified and not another? What about the person who puts in the most time not getting paid and the person who puts in far fewer hours getting paid? etc., etc., etc. I want BADLY for teaching and speaking to improve in our local units (at at General Conference, despite the timing issues of it being telecast), but I personally don’t like the idea of paying people as “professionals” to try to do it. I just think it would cause more problems than it would solve.
It’s fine for us to disagree about this, btw.
Old-Timer wrote:SD, where does it end? Who gets paid and who doesn’t – and how would one be justified and not another?
By the impact it has on the rank and file member’s experience as a member of the Church. Are there gaps in the members experience that are consistent across mass surveys or data? If so, those are the areas which require attention. And when repeated efforts at training volunteers to improve these experiences fail, we then can resort to paid individuals who we can hold accountable in ways we can’t hold volunteers.
Quote:What about the person who puts in the most time not getting paid and the person who puts in far fewer hours getting paid? etc., etcetc.
I don’t see people keeping score in this regard. That kind of concern might be prevalent in a union, but in our organization, people largely just accept whatever the Brethren decide to implement.
Quote:I want BADLY for teaching and speaking to improve in our local units (at at General Conference, despite the timing issues of it being telecast), but I personally don’t like the idea of paying people as “professionals” to try to do it. I just think it would cause more problems than it would solve.
I’m not suggesting that we necessarily pay people to teach and speak — unless data shows this would be an appropriate thing to do to enrich the experience of the local members. For the business expertise the GA’s bring to the Church, they sure do a lousy job of gauging how the members feel about their local experience. It’s almost as if organizationally we say “we don’t mind if you have a good ward program!” [as long as other things important to us get done].
A couple more thoughts, mostly on the paid clergy or professional speaker, I love the CES, big name speaker rotation every once in a while. Question is who would select who that speaker was. My husband was a seminary teacher and we attended a lot of the big-wig trainings and there is an element of pride in the group. Or if they sent around apologists who just made your hair stand on end. It may not go so well. The idea is good, but it could use some tweaking, but I like it. I’ll never be a Bishop, but if I was one I might step out on a limb and contact other enjoyable LDS speakers in the area to talk just to freshen things up. On the paid people that SD is suggesting – I get what you mean. I grew up in a ward of successful business men and women. We were top notch in organization, planning, and carrying out activities. We were also very competitive. That fired our bellies like nothing else could. I agree so much more life skills can come from that. On the flip side I now live in a highly Evangelical area. Many of my closest friends are members of various congregations. We have attended their services and there are definitely more charismatic, energized, expressive pulpit moments in their meetings. I have noticed though when people don’t like a pastor they move. Either to a different congregation or different time like Saturday, or they find reasons to be more flexible. From this migratory pattern I gather we as human beings are not often satisfied even when we have trained professionals in our midst.
After watching these developments I find myself calling my ward my community. Some Sundays I connect deeply with a speaker or topic. Others I choose to pray, worship and observe others and see if I can connect in a personal way with them after the meeting. Even if it’s just a hello. I try to remember that Christ taught the pharisees that the purpose of the day was to glorify God.
If you’re bored in sacrament, and you’re not a woman or child (!)… maybe it’s worth trying to bless or pass around the sacrament. That’s less boring, at least you’re physically doing something. I would say the modern LDS church is half voluntary worship and the other half obligatory worship. Over the last two years I have been attending about once a month. When I go, I have an attitude of worship. I no longer have a calling so I try to go with the right frame of mind of worshiping. What would our services be like if it was truly a voluntary organization with people giving of their time & talents to help because they wanted to help, not because they have a lesson to teach, a correlation meeting to attend and then a long list of other church expectations. Most likely, there would be huge attendance drops at church. Maybe the three packed wards meeting in one building would have to consolidate. The people showing up would be the people that really wanted to be there. The Bishop would say here is what we need…there are families that have children that want a primary program, these families are putting this together, if you want to help contact so and so. Who would like to speak next Sunday? Nobody, that’s cool, how about we all just sing hymns, take the sacrament and if there is no other business we can all go home.
We ask people that never speak in public, don’t like to do it, have nothing to say and ask them to speak. We give individuals a manual and a class of 15 year olds and say good luck, we know you will do greatA few things on my mind:
1. In other churches the chapel is the “holy place”. It is where you enter with reverence and meditate, pray and worship. I have seen well intentioned Bishops try to increase reverence by having a choir sing or someone play music. It usually only has a short term effect. The chapel is loud and noisy. It is kind of funny when you think about it that half the congregation is texting, sleeping or bored out of their minds. The chapels have no stained glass, no pictures or murals. No indication of the history. How can you feel like worshiping in a totally whitewashed room? I have been in some great cathedrals in Europe and the sense of reverence always blows me away.
2. Forget giving every ward member a job. Do we really need to give people more to do? What’s wrong with a simple organization of people that want to come and worship and then go home? Organizations are needed to serve the members not the other way around. Why do things have to be so correlated? The modern church does not really serve its members.
If you got rid of all the many callings and organizations, at first, I think half of the congregation would bolt realizing that “hey, I don’t really have to be here anymore!” Some of those would come back realizing that they have a spiritual need and want to get involved, ask how they can help, actually want to be there and help tailor programs that meet the need of the congregation.
3. Some have mentioned music. Maybe this is different in some other wards but in my last three wards, worship through music is a dead and buried concept. No wonder everyone looks forward to the Christmas Sacrament meetings, we sing hymns everyone wants to sing, people are there because they feel like worshiping and you can’t help but participate.
Of course, this kind of stuff is never going to happen. If there was ever a Bishop that tried to get rid of callings and organizations and do what he and the other local members felt they needed, he would be gone and replaced with someone that follows the program. As long as the LDS church runs things like a corporation and meetings are run like a business some people will go find spiritual nourishment elsewhere.
I agree with much of what you say, but I think we should expand our investment in making our programs and meetings truly good, rather than reducing the time invested in the auxiliaries. Either that, or stop pretending our Church programs are a good use of time – and call a spade a spade. I would rather have my son in a community cub pack where there is more commitment, more stable leadership for example. My daughter in a different program where she can learn leadership. Restrict the YW program to social events since that’s about all that happens in our YM program — and they are poorly planned at that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.