- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
If you read some of my other posts today, you will see that I had some pretty good experiences at Church aimed at positively, and gently breaking down some of the negative and entrenched aspects of our weekly meetings that make me NOT want to go sometimes. I now feel completely energized to level my efforts on making our Ward a more positive place to be on Sundays. Rather than being subject to it — I want to influence the boredom and truly elevate the engagement of our meetings. I’m considering creating a proposal on how to make our meetings more interesting to our Stake or Ward leadership — at this point, I have only a couple possible approaches to making it. Recognize that I am a former leader in our Ward, and an active member, teacher, with my wife holding down a demanding calling in the Ward. I also realize that proposals from people without authority often fall on deaf ears and can be annoying. We also have a paucity of leadership and willing people in our Ward to take on extra projects; it’s not like we have a high-functioning Ward. So people with initiative stick out and proactivity is often encouraged.
We also have a new Bishop looking for pet projects (he’s tried a couple things already, and one flopped miserably). We also have a set of BP Counsellors who I know and who have been sympathetic to some of the things I have suggested in other meetings. We have a sympathetic HPGL who keeps encouraging me when I come out with ideas that don’t fall under the SMA category, a member of the SP who is a former Bishop in our Ward with whom I have a friendship. My wife is a Ward leader and might be supportive. We also have a TBM high councillor who can quote the general handbook as fast as his social security number (just so you know the various forces acting in our Ward). I am also friends with the YM President and am on good terms with the EQP.
I would like to propose something that has an impact, and that will mean working within the guidelines of the current CHI, but leveraging every bit of leeway available so what I propose is not outlandish.
My question — how should I go about doing this in such a way that actually has an impact? I’m not asking about specifics at this point, just recognition that the eventual proposal is something that will be different to us as an organization, but not radical (like having a rock band in Sacrament meeting). I will post a separate thread for possible suggestions that fit my criteria of liberal, but justifiable with the CHI.
I will also continue this post below because it’s getting long.
I have a few process-oriented ideas to kick off the discussion: The Grass-Roots Approach1. Do an informal survey of people in the hall about how they feel about Sacrament meeting — nothing formal since it isn’t authorized. But ask verbal questions — do they find it engaging in general? Do they think there is room for improvement in making it more uplifting? If so, how? Let them know I’m doing this out of personal interest and asking people I respect for their opinions. Get some data and their suggestions to show the idea has widespread support.
2. Speak to three Ward leaders I am friends with about possible changes to the way we do things, and ask for suggestions. Write the people who have already given suggestions so far — rank and file members. After I get some of the lower level leaders on-side, go to one of the Bishopric members with whom I have a good relationship, and discuss some of the ideas informally — get their ideas.
3. Put all this down on paper, along with the informal data I collected, and some discussion of the breadth of people I have contacted and gotten opinions, without necessarily naming names — but ask for permission to put their name to suggestions when I get the data (if they say no, fine). Ask for a meeting with the Bishop, and bring a couple other members with me, potentially leaders or some of the rank and file members I have contacted and discussed ideas with. Furnish the data, and put it on his lap with a long list of suggestions for him to pick from — he may run it through Ward council, PEC or just Bishopric, or just pitch it — but at least I tried.
Lone-Gunman Approach1. Do the informal survey first, as in the Grass-Roots Approach.
2. With this approach I just write something up in the form of a short proposal (I write proposals in my work, and I make them very short and to the point). I then ask to meet with the Bishop or one of his councillors, or the Bishopric as a whole and go over it. Present it as a set of possible approaches to livening things up a bit.
What do you think of the Grass-roots approach and the Lone Gunman Approach? Is there another approach I could be using? Other ways of presenting the ideas to the leadership? I personally feel its’ important to avoid PEC because our traditional HC attends. Or would it be better to attend that meeting (with Bishopric permission) so I can counter some of his concerns, if any?
I’m not sure how to add to this. I see where you are going with it, but my personality is different. So I don’t think I have better advise. What is the point of the survey though? Is it to establish objectively that church isn’t satisfying members? And then using that as a lever to promote change in the directions of your own solutions? (nothing wrong with this IMO, but just trying to summarize the strategy). It looks like you are approaching it from an organizational perspective. I tend to bypass that, not asking permission, and acting like an independent agent provocateur. But I can only influence where I am personally present. Your approach has the advantage of leveraging leadership to influence on a larger scale.
Brian Johnston wrote:What is the point of the survey though? Is it to establish objectively that church isn’t satisfying members? And then using that as a lever to promote change in the directions of your own solutions? (nothing wrong with this IMO, but just trying to summarize the strategy).
That’s it exactly. Show broad-based support. It flies in the face of our top-down mentality as an organization, however. It COULD be perceived as mutiny, or definitely out of the norm — and you know how that gets treated oftentimes.
Quote:It looks like you are approaching it from an organizational perspective. I tend to bypass that, not asking permission, and acting like an independent agent provocateur. But I can only influence where I am personally present. Your approach has the advantage of leveraging leadership to influence on a larger scale.
[/quote]
I tend to do the same actually — I like to ask forgiveness rather than permission, and try to act independently — but that will not have much effect over the long run unless I am constantly on a treadmill. Particularly over Sacrament Meeting.
Which approach is better do you think — the grassroots initiative, the lone gunman approach or the following — the concientous coordinator approach:
Concientious Coordinator Approach:1. Collect the data as described in the other two approaches.
2. Offer to lead a joint committee made up of the Ward Music Director, a Bishopric Member, and representation from Primary, YM/YW and the priesthood bodies. Our role is to examine the issue and make recommendations to the Bishopric, consistent with the CHI.
Comments welcome…..
SilentDawning wrote:Which approach is better do you think — the grassroots initiative, the lone gunman approach or the following — the concientous coordinator approach
I think the world needs all of those types of people. Having one of each is synergistically better than having a powerfully focused three of one. The “better” approach is to heed the call, the path that calls you.
Your proposed “Conscientious Coordinator” role seems well-suited to you SD, so that sounds best to me.
I can imagine a lot of puzzled looks in the halls of my building if someone was doing any type of survey. I know a lot of people are comfortable with the “status quo” and would not be comfortable making any suggestions. You may want to target specific personalities – at least at first, maybe they could help guide you from there. Orson wrote:I can imagine a lot of puzzled looks in the halls of my building if someone was doing any type of survey. I know a lot of people are comfortable with the “status quo” and would not be comfortable making any suggestions. You may want to target specific personalities – at least at first, maybe they could help guide you from there.
My plan was to simply have conversations with people, rather than engage them in an open survey.
But I think I’ll do what you suggest — target some people who have liberal leanings or who love music.
Regarding the cultural aspect. You should read a response to a post by a traditional believer when someone made suggestions about using more approved instruments for instrumentals in sacrament (violins, flutes, french horns, etcetera) as well as spiritual songs by LDS artists that are more contemporary, but hymn like. And then asked people to respond to a survey giving their level of support for various initiatives. All the suggestions appeared to be based on the new CHI… read this woman’s comment:
Here is what she said in response to the post asking for feedback:
Quote:
Do you think your Bishop will be able to approve use of drums[note — drums was never suggested by the opening poster, who described using more ‘approved’ instruments, not drums]or songs not in the hymn book? Or that approval can come from the Stake? hmmmm… maybe you’d better send your survey results to Pres. Monson. In all honesty I had to laugh when I read your surveys.
I have found that I’m most engaged in Sacrement Meeting when I’m most intuned with the spirit. If you’re not feeling it, then you have moved away from the spirit.
This woman epitomizes the kind of blindness I think plagues our Church on issues that truly are inconsequential, deeming anything outside current practice with the famed descriptor “INAPPROPRIATE”.
Therefore, Orson’s suggestion that even reasonable suggestions based on the slightly more liberal guidelines in the CHI will be met with cultural resistence is a good one.
Also, telling everyone something is wrong with them if they aren’t uplifted by the stream of health-imonies, thankyoumonies, travelmonies, personal agendas, and apologies for being nervous or under-prepared, often mingled with other uplifting, spiritually motivated talks — is downright wrong in my view. Not everyone is on enough of a spiritual high to view a boring talk through spiritual eyes. Many need a positive experience. And simply because “The Church is True” (for those who believe it) doesn’t exonerate us from doing all we can to improve our meetings. Sheesh woman!!!!
Anyway, I needed to vent about that one.
SilentDawning wrote:This woman epitomizes the kind of blindness I think plagues our Church on issues that truly are inconsequential, deeming anything outside current practice with the famed descriptor “INAPPROPRIATE”.
Therefore, Orson’s suggestion that even reasonable suggestions based on the slightly more liberal guidelines in the CHI will be met with cultural resistence is a good one.
+1
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.