Home Teaching Changes are they more then just our Stake?


Recommended Posts

Guest mormonmusic

As I read your comments about people not showing up, and others not noticing, the thought came to my mind that really, people need to be personally responsible for their own activity. Yes, we should reach out to them as much as we can, but ulitimately, responsibility for one's activity rests with the individual.

I've had some pretty trying experiences in the Church, and while it's good if people reach out to you, ultimately, you have to be strong enough to survive without people necessarily always reaching out to you all the time.

This isn't to say that I think people should be left to flounder; ideally they should have all the benefits of being in a kind, caring community, but when that doesn't happen, it's up to the individual to pick up the slack.

I'm approaching some of my eventual Church responsibilities that way, when they come back around again. There is only so much you can do for people....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Update....so far

The "change" keeps getting put off now it is supposed to start Sept 1. Our EQ Home Teaching is being slaughtered in the mean time. 2 of 30 assigned families taught for July.

We (EQ Presidency) met with the High Council visitor during a change in 2nd councilor. He was released last year from our Stake Presidency after I think 8 years. According to him this policy was sent out 10-12 years ago but no Stake had ever put it into practice.

When we explained our concerns he said we should never stop visiting members. We should obey the Bishop of course but find ways to continue Home Visiting those who are off the list.

So we shall have to see in a few weeks what the change will be or if another postponement is in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We (EQ Presidency) met with the High Council visitor during a change in 2nd councilor. He was released last year from our Stake Presidency after I think 8 years. According to him this policy was sent out 10-12 years ago but no Stake had ever put it into practice.

Lol...probably because it's a bad idea!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol...probably because it's a bad idea!

I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, but I don't think it's a good fit for every ward.

For instance, a guy used to frequent here by the moniker mormonmusic. He was in a branch with a lot of families on the records and very few active priesthood holders. The program as outlined here would allow him the flexibility to assign home teachers to the less actives that are in most need of help or most likely to accept them, while focusing less on the members who are regularly attending. It allows for a better allocation of resources without completely burning out those who can do the home teaching.

In a ward like mine, we have some 30 companionships with 90 families on the records. It isn't unreasonable to ask that every family be visited every month when each companionship has only 2-3 families assigned to them.

What I don't condone in this suggested program is that active families don't ever need to be visited. The best home teaching organization I've seen was in a ward I used to attend where each companionship was given 1-2 active families and 1-2 less-active families. They were then instructed to visit the less-actives monthly, and the active families as often as was needed--monthly, bi-monthly, or at least quarterly). In the months when active families weren't visited, we were still expected to check in with them and evaluate their needs.

So it isn't an entirely bad idea, but just like the currently specified home teaching program, it won't work for every ward. Just my argument for flexibility in home teaching programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For instance, I've heard of areas in the Church where they have been instructed to discontinue ward welfare committee meetings. Instead, these topics are supposed to be open to discussion at all meetings (this is to reflect the addition of a fourth mission of the Church).

Hi Margin. What do you mean open to discussions at all meetings? What about confidentiality? (names of families in need, etc). Also, I thought Home Teaching was a program to reach every family, not every family in need.

Is there a link or source for that? I would love to read it. Thank you folks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Margin. What do you mean open to discussions at all meetings? What about confidentiality?

I had in mind leadership meetings, such as Bishopric, PEC, and Welfare Committee, and Ward Council meetings. These issues would not be brought up in Sacrament, priesthood, or Relief Society meetings.

(names of families in need, etc). Also, I thought Home Teaching was a program to reach every family, not every family in need.

Is there a link or source for that? I would love to read it. Thank you folks!

I seem to recall intending this as an illustration of the fact that changes may well be coming with the new edition of the handbooks, but some may have been piloted in small areas already. That is, some areas may have been instructed to try things in some way that isn't currently contained in the handbooks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic
Posted (edited) · Hidden
Hidden

I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, but I don't think it's a good fit for every ward.

For instance, a guy used to frequent here by the moniker mormonmusic.

Yes, I know mormonmusic a well as I know myself. He has suggested the following commentary and has authorized me to share it for him.

He was in a branch with a lot of families on the records and very few active priesthood holders. The program as outlined here would allow him the flexibility to assign home teachers to the less actives that are in most need of help or most likely to accept them, while focusing less on the members who are regularly attending. It allows for a better allocation of resources without completely burning out those who can do the home teaching.

This new policy/pilot/whatever it is -- isn't much different than what happens anyway, except refusing home teachers to active families would tick off a lot of people.

When there aren't enough resources to go around, as in my Ward, you can drag your brethren down by assigning them each 20 families to visit so everyone is assigned, or you can give the families that need home teachers the most -- giving each brother a more reasonable list.

In practice, what happened was this. You first assigned all the active people who were "screaming" for home teachers. And there were a significant number of them -- active elderly people, single mothers and others that had intentions to lean on their home teachers when they need something. And then, as a priesthood leader, you needed a buffer between yourself and needy active families so you don't run yourself ragged. So, needy active families who aren't necessarily asking for home teachers would get one.

After doing that, there were usually a couple dedicated brethren with room in their schedules you could trust to actually see the less active. There may have been other brethren with room in the schedule, but they wouldn't see less active people, having determined they wouldn't be responsive. Some of them had been in the ward so long they remember someone trying unsuccessfully with the less active you want to assign, so they didn't have the faith to go see those families. Others would refuse to alter their assignments even though they had people who would only accept a door visit or a note dropped off at their home.

Sometimes I would assign a less active family for home teaching, and they would allow visits, but then they would stay on the home teacher's list for several years since they weren't willing to do much other than accept home teachers.

Then, there are the people who spontaneously came back to Church -- often we had to drop the less actives from brethren's schedules since the spontaneous Church-returner was showing more potential and needed the resource.

So, to simply say "actives don't get home teachers" is kind of short-sighted and lacking practicality....there are a host of reasons we assign people to be home taught, and Church activity was only one consideration.

Edited by mormonmusic
Link to comment

But havent we all seen strong families unfortunally become weak ??

I moved into a ward a few years ago. A month earlier, the bishop was released, and a new one called. Within two weeks after my move, I was called into the YW presidency. The wife of the former bishop had recently been released from my new calling. I quickly found out that in those 5-6 weeks, the family had requested that their names be removed from the Church's records. I don't know if this was the reason for the bishop's release or if it was just good timing for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

I quickly found out that in those 5-6 weeks, the family had requested that their names be removed from the Church's records. I don't know if this was the reason for the bishop's release or if it was just good timing for him.

I've seen similar things happen many times, although never to the extent of name removal -- where after a release from a time consuming and demanding calling, the brother in the family, and sometimes the sister go less active.

In our Ward we had ex-Bishops and wives who were very less active. We also have a couple former priesthood leaders that are extremely lukewarm in their commitment and do odd things when you consider they were formerly high profile leaders in the Ward.

I've also seen a lot of people continue being dedicated and full-fledged in their activity after serving in hefty positions.

The difference -- for some, being in leadership provides a different perspective on the Church than what you see in general meetings as a non-leader. In those meetings the lessons focus on doctrine and spirituality, without too much of the hard temporal issues of running a unit or stake thrown in there. In certain types of leadership, you experience the Church as both an ecclesiastical and temporal organization, and I think the temporal side can be jarring for some, and may even hurt the idealism they had before taking on such positions.

If you're not careful, Church service can also take over your life and interfere with family and your job, so if you let that happen, I can see how some might view their Church service as a stumblingblock to their testimony.

Ultimately, I think people have to be held responsible for their own activity and spirituality. Leaders and members at large can help and try to promote activity, but gones are the days when I'm going to feel responsible for someone else's activity or inactivity.

So, if the home teaching pilot means active families are left without hometeachers so be it -- I've only had one faithful home teacher my whole life in the Church -- for about 3 of the 25 years I've been a member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Over the last few months the Stake has talked about major changes to how we Home Teach. It is now getting to the final stages in our Ward and will be implemented next month I believe. Someone mentioned yesterday it was not from our Stake but from Salt Lake City.

I just wanted to know if any other Stakes - Wards have been told to do this because many in our Ward myself included have lots of issue with this.

The purpose of the changes are to try and make sure that all our Home and Visit teaching resources go to those most in need.

Any Sister or any families considered "strong" are being removed from Home and Visit Teaching lists.

So the only people on the lists will be those who are "weak" in the gospel, have welfare needs, are less active or inactive. Widows or single parent families or part member families.

Most of the ones who are active Home or Visit teachers are those who will no longer have Home or Visit teachers. But they will then be given those "weak" etc ones to go and visit.

Is this happening in any of your Wards or Stakes?

It is happening in our stake. I had a very candid discussion with our stake president about six months ago. He thought we were doing a disservice to our membership by not home teaching all the active families, instead allocating our resources to less actives. I told him we were wasting an opportunity to go after less actives by only focusing on the active members. I think we might both be right. He gave an analogy about some water basin and draining the water, which is the active members, and then, those active members would also go inactive because they weren't receiving the attention. I argued that we didn't have many resources as it is, and that if we could start reactivating some of these brethren, they too could become a home teacher, thus increasing our resources and allowing us to then home teach active members. He said I held the keys and could do what I felt was necessary. It was nice to hear that since usually, you might hold keys but someone else is turning them.

Then, suddenly, a month later, there was this major revelation that the stake needed to change its home teaching and everyone needed to focus on the less actives. I'm not sure if this was revelation at the stake level, or SLC passing something down (everything I know about President Monson is that he is into reactivation) or just my idea making enough sense to spawn change under the guise of revelation... and I mean that last comment more in a joking manner, not cynically. I understand that information leads to inspiration.

So, to make a short story long :)... yes! We are doing a stake-wide change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a hard enough time getting our elders to visit the active members, the numbers will only go down if they take the active families out of the equation.

In ward council, our relief society president said "Does anyone have any good ideas for how I can increase our visiting teaching numbers? I don't know how to inspire us to higher than a 65 percent!"

My jaw dropped and I exclaimed out loud: "Could you please let me know how you get so high?!?!?"

We sit at about 25-30 percent :(. That's mostly the presidency, between 6-7 families apiece (two letter routes for each).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In ward council, our relief society president said "Does anyone have any good ideas for how I can increase our visiting teaching numbers? I don't know how to inspire us to higher than a 65 percent!"

My jaw dropped and I exclaimed out loud: "Could you please let me know how you get so high?!?!?"

We sit at about 25-30 percent :(. That's mostly the presidency, between 6-7 families apiece (two letter routes for each).

I'm going to pretend I didn't see that. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the new list that is supposed to start for September. My companion and I will have 3 families to visit each month.

So as not to have the so called "strong members" ignored I have 4 of them to call on the phone once every quarter.

While I have been very vocal on my opinion and concerns both verbal and in writting about this new program. And the fact that since it was announced both the EQ and HP Home Teaching has gone down to below 5% taught. I know for my family we are in a very tight spot at present but we are avoiding telling our "home teachers" so we don't get put on the need to visit monthly list as we are on the quarterly call list.

I believe in trying to change or point out issues where I can. Now that it is formalized and being implemented next week I am keeping my opinions to myself from this point on and working to help implement it as my role as a councillor in EQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

LDS Valley -- it sounds like if you want to have a home teacher you have to go inactive.... Sounds like this program may not work as conceived....Also sounds like they forgot about the other side of the coin -- the home teachers.

AS a former priesthood leader, I had home teachers who wouldn't go if the families weren't going to be easy to see or receptive -- you have to consider those brethren as well. It makes me wonder if that's why home teaching is down to 5% because the families to visit are hard to see, not receptive, etcetera, unlike an active family.

I'm SO glad I don't have to administer that program anymore!!!! It can have wonderful hot spots, fraught with many problems like the ones yu're describing. Also, you've highlighted another problem with the "new approach" -- by segregating families into two camps, they are creating a stigma for being on a regular home teaching route -- having a regular home teacher means there is something wrong or needy in your family when you assign home teachers along strict lines like this, with only the less active families getting a home teacher!!!

Edited by mormonmusic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is, we cannot home teach everyone in the average ward and be effective. Once you get beyond 3 or 4 families, you lose the ability to effectively do outreach. This is especially true if you have other responsibilities, such as in a presidency, etc.

For too long the Church focused on numbers. 100% home teaching. The men were always unfavorably compared to the sisters, who could count a phone call or a letter as a visit. It's about time we started doing the same with the men. I remember one ward in the South I lived in where of the 850 members, only 180 were active. It meant 15 families per home teaching companionship. The only effective ways we could do this was to visit each family on a quarterly basis. This still meant 5 families to visit, and so was on the edge of ineffectiveness.

Sometimes you have to face reality, and use your resources wisely. Wasting the resources where they are not needed nor appreciated does not help move the program forward, nor bless individuals.

It is important for the active members to have some contact, and phone calls are great for this. It saves time for both teachers and the families they visit. Most really do not want or need a visit from a home teacher, they just need someone they can contact if they have a need along the way (blessing, moving, tragedy, etc). This can often be addressed via other means besides in person every month.

I now am a service missionary in the Spanish Branch where I live. One of my goals is to help the Elder's Quorum presidency set up home teaching. A big struggle we have is that the members are spread out over three stakes. Using telephones to communicate to many of them may become an effective way to check on the families and determine their needs. And yes, we will count phone calls as home teaching visits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is, we cannot home teach everyone in the average ward and be effective. Once you get beyond 3 or 4 families, you lose the ability to effectively do outreach. This is especially true if you have other responsibilities, such as in a presidency, etc.

For too long the Church focused on numbers. 100% home teaching. The men were always unfavorably compared to the sisters, who could count a phone call or a letter as a visit. It's about time we started doing the same with the men. I remember one ward in the South I lived in where of the 850 members, only 180 were active. It meant 15 families per home teaching companionship. The only effective ways we could do this was to visit each family on a quarterly basis. This still meant 5 families to visit, and so was on the edge of ineffectiveness.

Sometimes you have to face reality, and use your resources wisely. Wasting the resources where they are not needed nor appreciated does not help move the program forward, nor bless individuals.

It is important for the active members to have some contact, and phone calls are great for this. It saves time for both teachers and the families they visit. Most really do not want or need a visit from a home teacher, they just need someone they can contact if they have a need along the way (blessing, moving, tragedy, etc). This can often be addressed via other means besides in person every month.

I now am a service missionary in the Spanish Branch where I live. One of my goals is to help the Elder's Quorum presidency set up home teaching. A big struggle we have is that the members are spread out over three stakes. Using telephones to communicate to many of them may become an effective way to check on the families and determine their needs. And yes, we will count phone calls as home teaching visits.

As current elders quorum president, I'm AM attempting to utilize the technology we have to make things easier. Fo example, we use Facebook to track down people who we can't find anymore. And I believe that if missionaries are taught to adapt the message, so should our quorum adapt to the different ways we can effectively teach. If that includes telephone, so be it. I think it is just important that we let someone know "Hey John/Bob/Phil/etc, I just wanted to call you, as your home teacher, and see how you were doing... " Stating it's down in this vein is important, especially to separate it from a normal telephone call you might make to the person as their friend (i.e., lots of our people home teach their friends).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

LDS Valley -- it sounds like if you want to have a home teacher you have to go inactive.... Sounds like this program may not work as conceived....Also sounds like they forgot about the other side of the coin -- the home teachers.

AS a former priesthood leader, I had home teachers who wouldn't go if the families weren't going to be easy to see or receptive -- you have to consider those brethren as well. It makes me wonder if that's why home teaching is down to 5% because the families to visit are hard to see, not receptive, etcetera, unlike an active family.

!

It was announced in Febuary that we were going to this new format. The change did not acutally occur until September 1st. So we were still using the old format which used to give us around 70% average home teaching of assigned families made up of both active and less active families.

So while on the old system but waiting for the new one to be implemented we dropped down in both high Prest and EQ. Of 5 EQ teams we have one consistantly hitting 80% (EQ President.) The rest including the full time Missionaries are under 20%. Overall since the end of Febuary it has been a continual decline in teaching. The only change during that time was the announcement that a change would occur.

This is the first month on the new system so I don't have numbers yet but it doesn't look good so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mormonmusic

This is the first month on the new system so I don't have numbers yet but it doesn't look good so far.

I wait with baited breath to hear the new set of numbers and how effectively the program works if you want to share it.

Edited by mormonmusic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are finally getting beyond the numbers and percentages to what is really important: families and individuals. For me, I usually don't need a hometeacher, nor do I have much time in my schedule to listen to a talk from the Ensign, which I've already studied. I do have a need for someone to help me when I have problems. But that normally does not require a hometeacher.

The focus is in sending hometeachers to the people who really need it. This new program does not mean that no active families will be home taught, but that the bishop and quorum presidents can be selective on who receives them. The stake presidency and bishopric probably do not need hometeachers, for example. But the person struggling with activity, probably does.

In areas outside of the Mormon base, there are lots of areas where one must travel long distances to home teach, or there are many inactives to deal with. To hometeach only the strong actives is a waste of priesthood time and talent. We are to leave the 99 and go after the one.

I once was in a ward that had 850 members, but only 175 were active. Had we assigned all families to a home teaching companionship, each companionship would have had 15 families to visit each month. That is not effectively possible. We had to look at our options. First was to select 1/3 of them for home teachers to see. Second was to assign all the families, but only have them visited quarterly.

I see the day coming when the Church will allow home teachers to make visits over the telephone to the father. Why? Because the lesson is not the important issue. The important thing is to have contact, encourage them to have prayers/scriptures/fhe/etc, and be there when there is a problem.

We waste tons of hours in ineffective actions, making ourselves feel good because we achieved 80% home teaching, when we need to be looking at how we can effectively use our limited resources. Personally, I think it is about time that the Church looked at making such changes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as i've said our area does something similar with the focus being on the inactive. i was told this sunday that my list would be changing, one of the sisters i've been visiting will be my companion for training and we'll be given someone new to replace her on the list. i guess it might be working here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wait with baited breath to hear the new set of numbers and how effectively the program works if you want to share it.

You can breath again. We hit 30% for EQ this month under the new system. Of the 20 families assigned to pure EQ teams we managed to teach 6. Our President did 3, a Husband - Wife team taught the husbands parents, and the full time Missionaries saw 2 of theirs this month.

Since these are the same ones taught every month except the FTM have been only getting one I am not sure how much an improvement it really made other then lowering the number of families expected to be taught which increased our average.

And I don't have a clue about the High Priest.

But at least the percentage went UP!!!!!!

PS I realize it is not months end yet but everyone passed in the numbers that they were done for the month of September.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

It's from a letter the First Presidency set out in early 90's. Which would be about when my previous Ward tried it.

Since Sept 2010 our stat's have gotten worse each month until we are under 20%

I brought up last month when I filled in for the EQ President at Ward C how the hand book says we are supposed to do it. I was blunt and said it will never work unless we do it the Lord's way and at this point what do we have to lose.

They are in the process of having EQ teach EQ with EQ companionships and the same with HP teaching HP with HP companionships. The rest of the families being split by the Bishop between the two groups.

I believe from the numbers of families to be taught that our Ward has tossed out the idea of only teaching less actives and 'weak' families and going back to teaching everyone again. I'll know when the new list comes out.

The EQ and HP don't include councilors in creating the new lists so I have no idea where it stands at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Organizing Home Teaching

Quorum and group leaders assign the most effective home teachers to members who need them most. When assigning home teachers, leaders give highest priority to new members, less-active members who may be the most receptive, and others who have the greatest need for home teachers, such as single parents, widows, and widowers. It is often helpful to assign a youth leader to a family where a young man or young woman is experiencing special challenges. Home teachers should be assigned to converts before the converts are baptized.

Adapting Home Teaching to Local Needs

In some locations, visiting every home each month may not be possible for a time because of insufficient numbers of active priesthood holders or other challenges. In these circumstances, leaders give priority to visiting new members, less-active members who are most likely to respond to invitations to return to Church activity, and members with serious needs.

Leaders do their best in using available resources to watch over and strengthen each member. Any adaptations they make to home teaching should be considered temporary.

Some suggestions for adapting home teaching are outlined in the following paragraphs.

Read more here

The idea of not assigning every family home or visiting teachers is in the 2010 CHI. A portion of the text and a link to the source is given above. What has to be understood though is that these are adaptations for units with few priesthood holders (or visiting teachers).

So, as much as some here want to say that the proposal explained in the original post is against the program the Church has outlined, that isn't entirely true. The question units need to ask isn't whether or not it's the right program, but whether or not their units would be better served by a temporary adaptation.

So here's a little numbers exercise to walk you through this. Let's say a ward has 100 families, and 50 priesthood holders. That makes 25 companionship. If you assign each companionship 2 families, you can hit 50 families in the ward. If you assign each companionship four families, you can hit every family in the ward. The question that you need to ask is how many families do you what each companionship to teach. Keep in mind that you have to balance work needs, family needs, and other calling needs; you don't want to overburden your home teachers. If every companionship can handle four families, great! If that isn't reasonable, then you might have to leave some families unassigned.

Now what happens in cases where you have 150 families on your records and only 50 priesthood holders. Now each companionship has to be assigned 6 families in order to assign everybody. Is that reasonable or fair to expect of them? Another adaptation would be to assign all the families, but only expect home teachers to be in their homes once every other month, or once a quarter. Or, as discussed above, you can choose which families need the most attention and assign those and leave others unassigned. It really won't be the end of the world.

An essential comment that must be made in any discussion like this is that we absolutely must stop evaluating our home teaching efforts solely in terms of home teaching percentage. Yes, the percentage is important, but knowing why your percentage is what it is is even more important.

For instance, my ward's home teaching percentage is about 40% in spring, summer, and fall, but in December, it drops down to about 20%. I can account for that because many of the members of my ward are students and are not in town for about half the month. So I don't worry about the drop because I know why it dropped.

As an independent evaluator of home teaching, percentage of visits does a terrible job. Home teaching percentage is but a very small component of the work of salvation. If we aren't looking at the lives of each individual family, then it is pretty pointless.

So instead of looking at home teaching percentage, look at why your home teaching percentage is what it is? Which companionships are routinely not doing their visits? Which families aren't getting visited? Which families need visits the most? Do families trust their home teachers? Do home teachers have good relationships with their families? Are the families' needs--spiritual and temporal--being met, and are the home teachers keeping the quorum and group presidencies aware of those needs?

But talking about families assigned and percentages entirely misses the point of home teaching. If those are the two issues we're going to talk about, home teaching will continue to decline, even if it does reach 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share