Missionary Work

[Anonymous]

I am new here but have been in an ongoing faith transition for several months. I started on NOM, but am really trying to focus on the positive and stay in the church. That is hard because, even several months in, the negative stuff is still “new and novel” so that is what my brain wants to focus on.

One thing I need special help with is how to interpret or think about missionary work in a way that doesn’t drive me crazy. My wife is TBM and loves (LOVES!) missionary work. Even before my faith crisis, I often had the feeling that i would actually be really sad if everyone on earth became a Mormon. I would feel like a lot of precious perspectives and things had been lost. As things are now, I really can’t hold onto the one-and-only-true-and-living-church concept. Without that belief, the whole concept of proselyting-type missionary work seems pointless. I have no problem with people learning about and joining the church, but I feel that the current missionary program really rushes people into commitments they may not fully understand without more time and exposure to the church. I also feel pushed to disrupt valued relationships by making invitations I’m not comfortable making. Honestly, I have a lot of friends who are really, really genuinely happy and wonderfully moral and great people that have never been members of the church. I feel like I have a lot to learn from them and that I wouldn’t be adding anything be inviting them to church.

Essentially, this whole “Hastening the Work of Salvation” concept is really hard for me. I want to distance myself from it. There are plenty of aspects of church membership that I love and treasure, but in the current climate at church (at least in my ward) all aspects of engagement seem to constantly be overshadowed by the “Work of Salvation” (i.e. proselyting and dragging people back that don’t want to be found).

How can I put some positive self-talk and framework around this concept?

[Anonymous]

I feel much the same as you do, and I think others here do as well. We’re all a bit different, though, and what works for one might not work for another. For myself, I don’t push the church at all. People I work with and know outside the church know I am a member, and some of them know I’m not a fully practicing member. I never initiate conversations about the church, but if someone asks I answer any questions they have truthfully. Although my view of some parts of Mormon doctrine are less than orthodox, I don’t think everyone needs to believe the way I do, and it is not my aim or desire to change anyone else’s faith. Likewise, it is not my purpose to tear down the church or make it appear unappealing. My wife, also TBM, isn’t that in to missionary work, either, so this works for us. The missionaries usually don’t ask, but if they ask the old “Do you know anyone” question, I simply so no and leave it at that.

[Anonymous]

Do what you can do without violating your conscience or causing undue stress. In anything you do, treat others as you would want them to treat you.

For me, it’s not more complicated than that.

The book, “To Mormons, with Love” is really good. The following link is to the Sunday School lesson I taught last week, using a summary of the suggestions to Mormons and non-Mormons in it as the primary content:

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3481&start=140#p67932

[Anonymous]

new6, I feel the same way you do… and somehow ended up as WML. I have my days.

Missionary work was one of the last aspects of the church that I was able to reconcile. Personally I’ve limited my own missionary efforts to reaching out to people that are attempting to connect with deity due to a missing connection or dissatisfaction with their current connection. I really don’t like the idea that we have to supplant someone’s faith/dogma because we take a hard line as the only path back to heaven. If someone is already happy and living gospel principles then perhaps missionary efforts would just create contention – whether between us and the person or between the person and their family.

I think sometimes as a missionary or well meaning member the focus can shift to baptisms, baptisms, baptisms. When this happens I start to feel manipulation replace love in the equation. My own opinion is that doing missionary work with love means helping others live true principles, regardless of whether there’s a baptism at the end of the interaction. That also means helping others live true principles if they want your help to live a true principle. If not, then I’m not going to impose my help on someone because I “know” they need it.

new6 wrote:

I often had the feeling that i would actually be really sad if everyone on earth became a Mormon. I would feel like a lot of precious perspectives and things had been lost.

Much in the same way that we lament the loss of world culture as we become more and more of a global culture.

new6 wrote:

Essentially, this whole “Hastening the Work of Salvation” concept is really hard for me. I want to distance myself from it.

I do to. I do not like it. The phrase itself rubs me very, very wrong. The intention is to motivate members that aren’t doing missionary work but I think the word hasten will have a few negative unintended consequences. Focus will shift to metrics. A certain number of baptisms, a certain number of BoMs handed out, etc. and making sure that the numbers always trend up, up, up. We’ll lose sight of the love that is supposed to be a part of the process and focus on what activities bring in the best ROI and whether we get enough baptisms to split a stake or some other goal that shifts focus away from people living principles.

Hasten the work was lifted directly out of the scriptures. I’ll lift a few as well.

D&C 10:4 wrote:

Do not run faster or labor more than you have strength and means provided to enable you to translate; but be diligent unto the end.

Mosiah 4:27 wrote:

And see that all these things are done in wisdom and order; for it is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength. And again, it is expedient that he should be diligent, that thereby he might win the prize; therefore, all things must be done in order.

Hasten can imply faster, faster, now, now, more, more. Another potential fruit of hastening a work is that the branches might outgrow the roots, or perhaps retention will become an overwhelming beast of a ministry effort for the people that remain. We already have a hard enough time with retention in our unit, half of next year’s mission plan goals will be related to perfecting the saints (strengthening the root). If we are a nice and happy people then others will come, and that’s the only reason they should come.

new6 wrote:

There are plenty of aspects of church membership that I love and treasure, but in the current climate at church (at least in my ward) all aspects of engagement seem to constantly be overshadowed by the “Work of Salvation” (i.e. proselyting and dragging people back that don’t want to be found).

I can relate. In the last few months most Sundays have seen two out of the three hours being dedicated toward hastening the work, usually translating to haranguing the members into doing missionary work.

new6 wrote:

How can I put some positive self-talk and framework around this concept?

The only thing I’ve come up with is to recognize that church is a good place to provide people with opportunities to love and be loved, serve and be served. It can be an extension of our family. Some people out there need that, we make our mistake in assuming everyone out there must have it. I look at missionary work as a program to reach out to the people that need what we offer.

[Anonymous]

I really appreciate your view. There are people out there who are genuinely seeking spiritual connections and communities to worship with. The challenge is to identify those people without annoying everyone else.

I could never serve as WML right now. I just recently asked to be released as EQP because of the heavy emphasis on “Hastening the Work.” It was just overpowering every other aspect of service. I wish there was more room for people to approach the church at their own pace. This is how I would envision the perfect missionary experience…

My family and I are not perfect, but we feel generally and genuinely really happy most of the time because of the things we do and believe in that are influenced positively by our participation in the church. We are friendly and happy people and have many friends that are not members of the church. Organically, it becomes apparent to many of these friends that we are members of the church, that we value it, and that it contributes to the positive aspects of who we are. We don’t talk about religion all the time, but when friends bring it up, we answer their questions. After years of intimate friendship and watching how church participation works in our lives, some small percentage of these friends become interested and ask how to become more engaged themselves. I invite them to attend church with us. They are welcomed warmly (but not cloyingly so) by other ward members. They are not attacked by missionaries and asked to make commitments. They begin attending off and on for a few months. Eventually, they begin attending very regularly, and in the course of regular Sunday School instruction and Sacrament meeting talks, they learn about baptism and how membership in the church starts. They decide to be baptized. The bishop will have been getting to know this family over the months (or years) they’ve been attending and sees that they really understand what it means to be members of the church and the level of commitment expected. He interviews them, just to make sure, and authorizes their baptism. In my idealized picture of missionary experience, there is no requirement to even have full-time missionaries. Young people gain a lot from serving missions, though, so maybe there could be a part at the end, where the family asks to be baptized, when full time missionaries could teach them a set of lessons.

In this scenario, retention would not be an issue because all of the change was self-motivated and based on genuine attraction to something they were already experiencing. They would have had time to amply prove to themselves (and less importantly to ward leadership) that they are able and willing to make the commitments involved in membership. They will have had time to acclimate to membership in the ward family and to make their own genuine friendships with other ward members besides us. They will have had opportunities to learn about most of the historical and social issues that are negative/problematic and reconcile them prior to making their commitment (or not commit if they perceive the problems to be irreconcilable).

I know that’s just a pipe-dream but it’s something I wish the church could move toward. Maybe full-time missionary work could be more similar to the way other christian religions do it (i.e. humanitarian service and generally being a positive influence among the people they are living with). I feel like there is just no room for this kind of genuine inquiry and interest because people are instantly mobbed and pushed. We, as a church, are like a venus fly trap, where I wish we were more like a flower that actually provided nectar and then allowed people to move on, or stay, as they see fit. It’s no wonder that so many people outside the church are wary of interactions with Mormons in general, and missionaries in particular.

Bringing back less actives is even more problematic in some ways. My view is that they have been members (they at least had to attend twice to get baptized). They know where the church is and how to get there if they want to. If they are not attending, they have a reason, and generally, the reason is none of my business. I have no problem making periodic visits (or even regular visits if they want them and and enjoy them). However, when someone dodges me at the door or doesn’t return my phone calls, they are communicating a message to me. the message is, “I don’t want to talk to you.” I feel compelled to respect their indirect expression of agency and let them come back in their own time (or not). For those brave enough to actually answer the door and tell me they don’t want visits, I certainly feel that respecting their wishes is paramount. My bishop’s approach is to send me back to find out why and “what we could do to bring them back.” If someone says, “don’t come back,” I don’t think they mean, “send someone else back to find out why I’m saying this.”

Anyway, I really appreciate everyone’s focus on love and service. If what I’m doing is truly helping someone, and they want the help, then I should do it. If it isn’t or they don’t want it, then I won’t.

[Anonymous]

I asked to be released as WML. The process was taking a long time and by the time they were getting around to calling a new person I found this site which helped me tremendously. I recently rescinded my request to be released… I still have my tough moments.

I like the organic process you describe, it may be a pipe dream but it is a very good pipe dream. In part I think this rush to baptism comes from missionaries that are typically only in an area for a few months and they really want to see someone they teach get baptized. As WML I’ve seen a few instances where that desire translated into manipulative practices. It can also come from yearly baptism goals.

new6 wrote:

I know that’s just a pipe-dream but it’s something I wish the church could move toward. Maybe full-time missionary work could be more similar to the way other christian religions do it (i.e. humanitarian service and generally being a positive influence among the people they are living with).

I would absolutely love it if the traditional full time missions served by youth would translate into something like you describe. Almost like the peace corps. Can you imagine the good that could take place with the infusion of about 80,000 people providing full-time service all over the world. Back in my TBM days I expressed the desire to serve a mission with my DW later in life. I still feel like I can do that but I will want it to be a service mission, not proselyting.

I do have one large and lasting concern with missionary efforts… but first allow me to deviate a bit.

Several years ago a convert gave a talk in a stake conference. They talked about how they found the church and why they were baptized. They also mentioned that after they got baptized they ran into an old childhood friend in the halls of the church and they had know this person to be a member all of their lives. They then related how they confronted the childhood friend: Why didn’t you ever talk to me about the church? Why didn’t you care about me? My salvation was at risk and you said nothing! I had to find the church on my own! From their account it sounded like a very confrontational experience.

My only reaction. 😯 :wtf: 😯 :wtf: 😯 :wtf: 😯 and I’ll leave it at that.

So this brings me to my remaining concern. Things that can lead to a faith crisis are readily available in the information age. Someone hits stage 4 and if I was an instrument in helping someone convert I’d fully expect: Why didn’t you ever talk to me about the church? Why didn’t you care about me? You brought me in knowing this, that, and the other?!

I went to a dark place and I’d much rather not help people take that first step that may eventually lead them to that same dark place. Then again perhaps they never will go to that dark place… or perhaps there’s no way to avoid it for some. Those that go to that dark place would have ended up there regardless of the path.

I’d love to be a “stage 5 missionary” some day, helping people that want out of stage 4. I don’t think I can be a stage 3 missionary.

[Anonymous]

new6 wrote:

I am new here but have been in an ongoing faith transition for several months. I started on NOM, but am really trying to focus on the positive and stay in the church. That is hard because, even several months in, the negative stuff is still “new and novel” so that is what my brain wants to focus on.

Welcome to the boards here. That’s why I’m here, too—I don’t want to dwell on the negative. I’m trying to stay committed to the church, and I need positive vibes and support, not negativity. I look forward to seeing you around here.

I’ve always found it a little odd how much emphasis is placed on missionary work when church doctrine also teaches that people will have opportunities to embrace the gospel after death. Even the saving ordinances can be performed for them. Why is it so urgent to bring the word to everyone RIGHT NOW? Every now and then I hear people say that it’s harder to “convert” in the afterlife, but all the explanations for why that might be just sound like wild theorizing to me.

[Anonymous]

new6 wrote:

I wish there was more room for people to approach the church at their own pace.

my family participates in several Christian churches in our local community. I have been impressed with the Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA) approach to this. Essentially they have lots of unique ideas just like we do. They have different practices and dietary restrictions like we do.

In talking to them they appear to have developed some sort of sliding scale. If you are convinced in your heart that Saturday is the true Sabbath and you are called to keep it – then this to you is an important step. Many SDA’s are vegetarian. If you feel called to vegetarianism as part of your walk with God then God is calling you to make that step.

As near as I can tell, they still believe their doctrine and way of doing things to be the ideal way – but that God will reveal his ways to individuals step by step. The heathen can be pleasing God in his limited way as he takes the tiniest steps. I remember a man testify that at an early stage in his religious life he swore off drugs and fornication on the Sabbath. He said that he believes God was pleased with this baby step and continued to walk with him through all the steps that followed.

So anyway – I see many similarities between our two churches and I wonder if this “sliding scale” might one day be successfully utilized in the LDS church.

BTW, the SDA approach is frustrating for my wife. She wants them to come out and say that they have the one true Sabbath and commandments and church and dietary code. She thinks they are being evasive. This shows me that no approach will be successful with everyone.

[Anonymous]

Had posted this on another thread but someone linked to this thread and I think this is a better space to hash out some other thoughts I have about this:

My other post:

“I don’t know if this will take the discussion to far from the original topic, but what are folks on this sites views of missionary work after a FC? I have never been very comfortable with missionary work, I worked hard as a missionary, but wasn’t “successful” from a # of baptisms perspective probably due to personality and having no interest in berating someone into becoming a member. I don’t really feel comfortable inviting people to church to have them hear from the majority of members that it is the only true church when I don’t really believe that to be the case.

Our Stake is making a huge push for missionary work (probably similar everywhere else), and I can’t be on board with it. I would feel much more comfortable inviting people if I didn’t feel like they would be pressured into missionary lessons, wouldn’t feel like their faith is lesser, and could grow at their own pace instead of feeling like they have to accept the truth tomorrow.”

Agree with the thoughts on this discussion thread. I really like the pipe-dream that was laid out. That is my pipe dream as well. As I have a stake calling it is harder to ignore.

A couple months ago our SP challenged us (those with the same calling I have) to invite someone to have a discussion with the missionaries in their home. During that time I read the book “Coming Apart” by Charles Murray. It is a fascinating book. And as I was reading it, I read it in the context of missionary work. The gist of his argument is that the elites in society have essentially created enclaves for themselves. The affluent and wealthy interact mostly with themselves. A large portion of them live very conservative values (get married, get educated, don’t have kids out of wedlock, provide for your family) while the other segments of society are not living those values and their is a high economic and social cost involved. The “elites” are pretty happy when you look at the survey data. They are involved in their communities, schools, and churches and are pretty religious.

To tie back to missionary work; most of the baptisms I have seen in our stake are folks from lower socio-economic situations. We have rarely had any baptisms fromhigher socio-economic situations. Now I believe the gospel is for everyone, however, the ward I was assigned to work with had a very hard time balancing the normal business as usual workload with the missionary workload. Every ward council we would spend a significant amount of time trying to figure out how to just get people to church. I just felt it was impossible to actually help the members in the ward. So much time was being allocated elsewhere. If we think about new members from a progression perspective (and if this generalization offends anyone, sorry, not sorry) new members form a lower socio-economic situation are not able to contribute to the ward in a significant way for a while. Elites typically are educated, have some leadership experience, and are able to contribute much more quickly.

And on the other end, to ‘convert’ those from higher on the socio-economic ladder the pipe-dream laid out by new6 really has to be the way since they are typically pretty happy where they are at. So when reporting back to my SP I told him I wasn’t able to invite anyone over, but our family would invite 3 non-member families over for dinner sometime this year and just get to know them. That was the most I felt comfortably committing to. He seemed to be Ok with that. In hearing others report back, it felt like I (one of little faith) was one of the few who had put a lot of thought into the challenge.

Anyway, thoughts are a bit scattered. But in general, not a fan of the current missionary program. I will do things the way I think is best for me and my family. Would LOVE it if they revamped and made missions service missions.

-SunbeltRed

[Anonymous]

new6 wrote:

How can I put some positive self-talk and framework around this concept?

I’m going to give some odd advice. When i was a priesthood leader, I was always advocating missionary work. It would frustrate the tar out of me when brethren wouldn’t do it. Then, I was exposed to personality theory, and that certain people have certain strengths. I then realized that certain people were about execution — putting on events, serving others, doing home teaching, cleaning the chapel. Others were about planning and directing the work of others, but didn’t like doing such work themselve. Still others were simply strong in relationship-building, in the absence of doctrine. And others, were about influencing others to behave a certain way.

Member missionaries (effective ones with staying power) tend to have a natural strength for the latter — influencing others to behave a certain way, such as join the church.

So, my advice is to claim your personal strengths as they apply to missionary work. Befriend the investigator, without teaching doctrine (build relationships). Serve them when necessary, and invite them to work alongside you on good projects (executiion without teaching doctrine). But simply indicate to the sometimes overzealous local leaders that “proselyting is not my strength”, and come out with other ways you can support the missionary effort.

Depending on where your strengths lie (executing, planning, or building relationships), seek opportunities to learn alongside good people from other religions. Look for opportunities to work alongside them in non-doctrinal, pure service activities (execution). Get your Ward mission involved if they want. But focus on the pure service aspect and building positive relationships with brothers and sisters outside of the church (relationship building). Let that be your non-doctrinal missionary work, and leave the influencing of others through teaching and invitations to baptism, hear discussions etcetera to the people who are zealous about the influencing part of missionary work.

The brethren I used to lead had no qualms about telling me they weren’t willing to do active missionary work (the direct influencing). In spite of all the church teaching about it. but they were willing to be friends with people, to serve them, etcetera.

Claim that for your own.

[Anonymous]

When the missionaries came over to our house a little while ago, one of them asked if they could help us create a family mission plan. I simply smiled and said something like:

Quote:

We’ve been sharing the Gospel with people in every way we feel comfortable for a long time. That’s our plan, so, no thanks. We’re fine.

I know it surprised them, since we are a totally active family, but how we share the Gospel (NOT “do missionary work”) is something we try to own ourselves. Enough talks have been given lately in General Conference saying there is no one right way that, if I have to do so, I can explain my refusal to back any particular program by mentioning those talks. Generally, however, I don’t try to explain any more than what I said above.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

When the missionaries came over to our house a little while ago, one of them asked if they could help us create a family mission plan. I simply smiled and said something like:

Quote:

We’ve been sharing the Gospel with people in every way we feel comfortable for a long time. That’s our plan, so, no thanks. We’re fine.

I know it surprised them, since we are a totally active family, but how we share the Gospel (NOT “do missionary work”) is something we try to own ourselves. Enough talks have been given lately in General Conference saying there is no one right way that, if I have to do so, I can explain my refusal to back any particular program by mentioning those talks. Generally, however, I don’t try to explain any more than what I said above.

I really experience this as both a constructive and positive force(event) for both the gospel sharer and the gospel interested. Thanks Ray, that’s a simpler way to phrase it then I have accomplished.

[Author]

Posts