Sign in to follow this  
mikbone

Ppi?

Recommended Posts

Good Afternoon mikbone. I hope you have been well! :)

The quorum president has a right to receive revelation as it pertains to the quorum. As Vort pointed out, the Quorum Presidency has a responsibility for the spiritual and temporal welfare of their quorum and doing personal interviews of the quorum members seems like a means of fulfilling this responsibility. Each quorum president can receive revelation on how they are going to implement the responsibility of watching over their quorum.

But, if you are a counselor in the EQ presidency then you certainly can counsel with your president and let him know your feelings. My suggestion though is that if he disagrees, you move on. There is nothing evil going on and I would not get hung up on this point.

Regards,

Finrock

Thank you. And yes I am well.

I do respect personal revelation as well as revelation from my local leaders. But this single issue of Monthly PPIs with all quorum members seemed over the top. It is an incredible time consumer between setting up the visits and performing them. It struck me as micro-management. And it can only lead to failure in my opinion. Especially in a quorum whose HT numbers are usually in the teens...

As I already related when I addressed my concerns with my EQP, he was in agreement with my assessment and relieved that I was able to point out the Handbook reference which implies that elder quorum visits or interviews should be yearly. I did not go into details concerning where his understanding of the monthly PPI concept originated and frankly I don't really want to get into the details. It came from somewhere, no doubt. Perhaps from the '75 Ensign article previously cited. Or from another local leader...

"The greatest fear I have is that the people of this Church will accept what we say as the will of the Lord without first praying about it and getting the witness within their own hearts that what we say is the word of the Lord." Brigham Young

We plan on doing our yearly interviews. And with the extra time on our hands we have implemented a program of setting appointments for less active home teachers and actually going home teaching with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do respect personal revelation as well as revelation from my local leaders. But this single issue of Monthly PPIs with all quorum members seemed over the top. It is an incredible time consumer between setting up the visits and performing them. It struck me as micro-management.

If the quorum president asked/instructed you to do this, he's the one who holds the keys, so it IS his decision. And if your stake president asked/instructed you to do this, then he holds the priesthood keys over the entire stake, and specifically over the Melchizedek Priesthood, so it is entirely within his rights and duty to give such an instruction.

Really, your only legitimate question is: Do you sustain your leaders?

And it can only lead to failure in my opinion. Especially in a quorum whose HT numbers are usually in the teens...

I strongly suspect that it's the weak HT numbers that have prompted this instruction. In my experience, there is nothing like accountability to make home teaching numbers improve drastically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the quorum president asked/instructed you to do this, he's the one who holds the keys, so it IS his decision. And if your stake president asked/instructed you to do this, then he holds the priesthood keys over the entire stake, and specifically over the Melchizedek Priesthood, so it is entirely within his rights and duty to give such an instruction.

Really, your only legitimate question is: Do you sustain your leaders?

I believe that I do.

In your above statement you seem to champion the, "When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done." Ideology. I have read enough of your posts here on LDS.net to know that you don't really think this way...

Do you think that I am apostate for using the light of Christ and questioning the decisions of my leaders when I have a legitimate feeling of unease? Is it wrong to search the scriptures and Handbook and ask for a meeting on a certain topic that our leaders have presented?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your above statement you seem to champion the, "When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done." Ideology. I have read enough of your posts here on LDS.net to know that you don't really think this way...

On the contrary, when our leaders speak, my assumption is that they are not pulling this idea out of their nether regions on a lark. I assume rather that they have thought long and hard about it, and have probably prayed about it and sought the will of God. So when they speak, I do in fact assume there has been a great deal of thinking done.

Do you think that I am apostate for using the light of Christ and questioning the decisions of my leaders when I have a legitimate feeling of unease?

Not at all. I think that, as a counselor, it is your duty to counsel with your leaders, which includes telling them your thoughts and feelings. But if you suggest that it is your duty or your privilege to simply ignore their instruction and do things the way you think they should be done (and I have not seen you say that), then I think you would be way out of bounds on that matter.

Is it wrong to search the scriptures and Handbook and ask for a meeting on a certain topic that our leaders have presented?

No. And ideally, you would reach a common understanding with them before proceeding. But if you do not reach such a common understanding, your duty is to sustain them in their callings, which almost always would mean to do what they have instructed you to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary, when our leaders speak, my assumption is that they are not pulling this idea out of their nether regions on a lark. I assume rather that they have thought long and hard about it, and have probably prayed about it and sought the will of God. So when they speak, I do in fact assume there has been a great deal of thinking done.

I think we are interpreting this classic article differently. The thinking has been done article that I am referring to is, When the Prophet Speaks, Is the Thinking Done? « FAIR

You appear to read it as if the author was implying that when a church leader speaks, He has performed his due diligence, studied it out in his mind, prayed about it, and received devine inspiration. Thus the leader's thinking is done.

I interpret the authors meaning as a bit more sinister. Such as, when a church leader speaks, those members whom are in the audience have no need to think about the directive. It is the word of God. The thinking is done move on and obey blindly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was informed that I was to ask pointed questions concerning the Elder, his family, job circumstances, his marriage, home teaching families, set goals with him both personal and family, and ask him if he was exercising his priesthood. And if there were any recommendations that he had for the quorum presidency.

This was strange because it seemed like an undue amount of time committment on both the quorum members and presidency. And frankly I am a quiet person and somewhat anti-social and I really don't want to get into other members personal business. Not to mention the issues of confidentiality, etc. Furtermore I was not set apart to do such intimate interviews neither was I trained in how to conduct these interviews. And if there are issues that come up during these interviews... I assume that I would defer such issues to the bishopric anyway. And I have never had such an interview as a member of my previous quorums.

I agree that the monthly frequency is excessive and I would also be concerned about the blanket approach of hunting for problems. I realize this is different for the Priesthood but when I was in the Relief Society Presidency we would focus on two or three families in the ward that we were "inspired" to fellowship. Sometimes we discovered areas that we could assist that nobody knew about. The two or three number was doable but any more and we simply didn't have enough time to really help anyone. If we did more, it was just a quick, "How are you? Great!", drop off the feel good loaf of bread or whatever and move onto the next one without really helping with the specific issue. By doing just one or two per month it might be a better quality experience over quantity.

[btw, I really have a hard time believing that you would find it difficult as a physician to sit down and conduct an interview that involves intimate issues - I would think you likely have the most skills out of any of your quorum to conduct such intimate interviews - maybe there is inspiration there that you are not seeing right now.]

Also, we as a whole (speaking from personal experiences), probably need to start (i.e. - little by little) feeling okay with everyone knowing our business. After all the Celestial Kingdom is like the Urim and Thummim ... its all out there for everyone to see and share. Some things about the Celestial life we have to learn to like, doesn't come natural.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw, I really have a hard time believing that you would find it difficult as a physician to sit down and conduct an interview that involves intimate issues - I would think you likely have the most skills out of any of your quorum to conduct such intimate interviews - maybe there is inspiration there that you are not seeing right now.

LoL, there is quite a lot of difference between a physician and a Orthopaedic surgeon. I think of myself as a carpenter with sterile instruments. I almost failed my psych rotation because I though that most of it was garbage.

I don't like to get into intimate issues with my patients. Thats what a primary care physician if for. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been serving as EQP for three years and......do PPI's...quarterly sometimes. I receive quarterly PPI's.....sometimes ..from the Stake President. I think monthly is ...over bearing personally. My two counselors are responsible for HT reporting and have companionships that they over see and report on monthly. We do our best...we have a large and active Quorum...typically 25 -30 brethren on Sundays. The counselors focus on the needs of the families being taught and I focus on the individual needs of the quorom members via PPI.

Edited by bytor2112

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did find a power point presentation on these EQ PPIs - Personal Priesthood Interviews

And I also saw a youtube video of a EQ president stating that he used the monthly PPI as an effective way to increase his quorum's home teachings numbers.

My fear is that someone with a professional administration job is trying to apply what he knows from business to his EQ calling and recommending the same to others.

I have been in 6 wards, in 3 states, over 4 decades. They all had PPIs Do you really think

the influence of someone with a professional administration job could spread over such a large area of distance, and time? Brother Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been in 6 wards, in 3 states, over 4 decades. They all had PPIs Do you really think

the influence of someone with a professional administration job could spread over such a large area of distance, and time? Brother Ray

Monthly PPIs?

Every 2 years I get an interview from my bishop and stake president for a temple recommend. it works for me.

Youu ever done 360 evaluations? Couple years ago a hospital administrator had everyone in the hospital evaluating everyone. I'm not sure it accomplished anything other than giving the administrator a whole bunch of reading material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are interpreting this classic article differently. The thinking has been done article that I am referring to is, When the Prophet Speaks, Is the Thinking Done? « FAIR

You appear to read it as if the author was implying that when a church leader speaks, He has performed his due diligence, studied it out in his mind, prayed about it, and received devine inspiration. Thus the leader's thinking is done.

I interpret the authors meaning as a bit more sinister. Such as, when a church leader speaks, those members whom are in the audience have no need to think about the directive. It is the word of God. The thinking is done move on and obey blindly.

Your interpretation has a danger to it, because I've never heard the bretheren of the church echo any such sentiment. Presitent Benson's son certainly felt this way, and even said so during a 60 Minutes interview. When the bretheren give new directives, it has always been assumed that the members would individually, and as a family, take up the matter in personal prayer and seek to add it to their testimony, to confirm from God himself that what was said is actually true.

Think about it; if your interpretation is how it is intended to be done, why bother giving everybody the gift of the holy ghost? If we're not supposed to do our own searching and due dilligence, why even preach the importance of personal prayer?

Now, I understand that this is your interpretation of the article in question and not necessarily what your personal view is of the issue. I just wanted to get my thoughts out on that very common misconception of our church, and of Christianity in general.

Off of my box, and done hijacking the thread :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your interpretation has a danger to it, because I've never heard the bretheren of the church echo any such sentiment. Presitent Benson's son certainly felt this way, and even said so during a 60 Minutes interview. When the bretheren give new directives, it has always been assumed that the members would individually, and as a family, take up the matter in personal prayer and seek to add it to their testimony, to confirm from God himself that what was said is actually true.

Think about it; if your interpretation is how it is intended to be done, why bother giving everybody the gift of the holy ghost? If we're not supposed to do our own searching and due dilligence, why even preach the importance of personal prayer?

Now, I understand that this is your interpretation of the article in question and not necessarily what your personal view is of the issue. I just wanted to get my thoughts out on that very common misconception of our church, and of Christianity in general.

Off of my box, and done hijacking the thread :D

Did you read the entire link, including George Albert Smith's reply to the article in question?

I'm pretty sure that the original author implied that we should follow our leaders blindly. It's even worse that the title of the article is following the Prophet. The he makes the blanket statement for all church leaders at the crux of the arguement.

I agree with George Albert Smith. We should get our own confirmation that we are following God's will.

I have never in my life had to question the council of a prophet or anything presented in a general conference. But I have served under Bishops and stake presidents whom were later excommunicated. As well as an inactive mission president...

Edited by mikbone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are interpreting this classic article differently. The thinking has been done article that I am referring to is, When the Prophet Speaks, Is the Thinking Done? « FAIR

You appear to read it as if the author was implying that when a church leader speaks, He has performed his due diligence, studied it out in his mind, prayed about it, and received devine inspiration. Thus the leader's thinking is done.

I interpret the authors meaning as a bit more sinister. Such as, when a church leader speaks, those members whom are in the audience have no need to think about the directive. It is the word of God. The thinking is done move on and obey blindly.

Actually, this is exactly the article I had in mind. In context of the article, I think my interpretation is the most natural and certainly the most reasonable. However, many others interpreted it as you state, and President (GA) Smith went so far as to assure one gentleman that the phrase (or his interpretation thereof) was not the Church's position.

I suspect we are in agreement on the principle. I suppose I object to what I perceive as looking for disagreements with Church teachings. I think it's more profitable to figure out how we agree than how we think we disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read the entire link, including George Albert Smith's reply to the article in question?

I'm pretty sure that the original author implied that we should follow our leaders blindly. It's even worse that the title of the article is following the Prophet. The he makes the blanket statement for all church leaders at the crux of the arguement.

I agree with George Albert Smith. We should get our own confirmation that we are following God's will.

I have never in my life had to question the council of a prophet or anything presented in a general conference. But I have served under Bishops and stake presidents whom were later excommunicated. As well as an inactive mission president...

at the risk of redundancy.....

Now, I understand that this is your interpretation of the article in question and not necessarily what your personal view is of the issue. I just wanted to get my thoughts out on that very common misconception of our church, and of Christianity in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genesis 18: 13-18

Was Jethro apostate in the above scripture?

Exodus, perhaps?

Jethro was Moses' father-in-law, and had every parental right to counsel him. I am sure Moses welcomed the counsel, as well. So no, Jethro was not apostate in his actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genesis 18: 13-18

Was Jethro apostate in the above

scripture?

First I think you meant Exodus 18: 13-18...

Second Jethro was Moses's father-in-law and the man who ordained Moses to the priesthood. So I think it is safe to say there was a stewardship in play when Jethro did so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes Exodus, thanks.

So, if anyone other than the Lord, or the Prophet's father, or whomever ordained the Prophet were

to mention that what Moses was doing was not right they would

have been apostate?

Edited by mikbone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes Exodus, thanks.

So, if anyone other than the Lord, or the Prophet's father, or whomever ordained the Prophet were

to mention that what Moses was doing was not right they would have been apostate?

My understanding: If someone with no authority presumed to instruct the prophet who held the keys of Priesthood leadership, they would be out of line and guilty of ark-steadying. This applies double if the prophet does not welcome the "instruction".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Monthly PPIs?

Every 2 years I get an interview from my bishop and stake president for a temple recommend. it works for me.

Youu ever done 360 evaluations? Couple years ago a hospital administrator had everyone in the hospital evaluating everyone. I'm not sure it accomplished anything other than giving the administrator a whole bunch of reading material.

I don't understand your answer. Probably because I'm a dummy, but maybe because I didn't make my point clear.

In 1970 I belonged to a ward in Florida. We had PPIs Today I belong to a ward in Ca. we have PPIs. How could one business mans ideas influence both? Not only are they separated by distance, but they are also separated by time. Brother Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand your answer. Probably because I'm a dummy, but maybe because I didn't make my point clear.

In 1970 I belonged to a ward in Florida. We had PPIs Today I belong to a ward in Ca. we have PPIs. How could one business mans ideas influence both? Not only are they separated by distance, but they are also separated by time. Brother Ray

I'll try to be more specific.

The Handbook states 7.3.2

"Where possible, they visit or interview quorum or group members at least once a year."

The term Personal Priesthood Interview is not in the handbook nor the scriptures. You can find it in the Ensign yes and all over the Internet. I remember when I was a missionary and was instructed to give discussions from memory word for word. The missionaries no longer are required to do this, their discussions are much more free flowing allowing circumstances and the spirit to dictate how they teach.

If you have been having monthly PPIs since the 1970s that would be approximately 500 PPIs. I highly doubt that you have had near 500 PPIs... If you have had that many, you have my condolences.

When my EQ president informed me that we are required to do monthly PPIs with each and every member of our Elders quorum I felt a great unease, for the following reasons.

1) Time requirement for interviews would be excessive and burdensome on the presidency, members and secretary setting the appointments.

2) It felt like I was to micromanage the Elders in our quorum. With directed questions about their life, Goal setting, and accountability.

3) Repetitive nature of these interviews would no doubt make the interviews less significant than annual interviews or visits.

4) I had never had monthly PPIs previously as a member of my prior quorums in Texas, Utah (BYU), or California.

5) I am already having plenty of contact with the EQ members with church events, home teaching, home teaching reports, weekly priesthood meetings, etc.

6) The requirement of these monthly PPIs is not reasonable, and in my opinion will lead to failure. Especially in a ward whose home teaching numbers were in the teens.

7) When I asked my EQP if the PPIs were having any positive effect on the HT numbers he said that they were not.

7) The Handbook does not recommend monthy PPIs.

This monthly PPI recommendation struck me as a business model of a boss micromanaging and checking up on his employees. Much like the 360 degree evaluations where I used to have to evaluate my Attending Surgeons, nurses, etc, during my residency. All the residents would sit down for an hour at the end of each month and circle numbers. Some residents would vent on their evaluations whereas I would never leave any comments. Those 360 evaluations did not have any effect on our business model other than wasting an hour of my life every month until we decided as a group to stop the process after a 6 month trial.

I recommended to my EQP that we do PPIs on a annual basis and that with the time that we save we could actually work on Home teaching. I asked my EQP to give me the names of some elders who were not doing their HT and that I would start taking them out Home teaching to teach their families. This gives me the opportunity to pray with the Elders. Show them what a home teaching visit consists of, and meet some of the ward members in their homes. It allows personal visits with the elders, and bolsters our HT numbers.

I have a testimony of Home Teaching not monthly PPIs. I felt inspired to question the motivation and plan of my EQP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mentioned that you are a part of the Elders Quorum Presidency; that should suggest that you also sit in council as a presidency. This would be a great opportunity to raise these concerns.

A lot of good thoughts and comments have been provided here, but ultimately, the EQ President holds the keys to direct the work of the quorum as the Spirit reveals to him. But always, always, always remember that there must be unity within the Presidency if there is to be unity within the quorum.

Best wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand your answer. Probably because I'm a dummy, but maybe because I didn't make my point clear.

In 1970 I belonged to a ward in Florida. We had PPIs Today I belong to a ward in Ca. we have PPIs. How could one business mans ideas influence both? Not only are they separated by distance, but they are also separated by time. Brother Ray

No one is stating PPI's should not be done, only that they should not be done monthly for every member of the quorum as the OP stated his EQ President wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good afternoon mnn727! I hope you've been doing well. :)

No one is stating PPI's should not be done, only that they should not be done monthly for every member of the quorum as the OP stated his EQ President wanted.

I'm assuming your use of the word "should" is the past tense of "shall" which speaks to something we must or must not do.

How do you justify the position that priesthood interviews should not be done monthly for every member of the quorum?

Regards,

Finrock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you justify the position that priesthood interviews should not be done monthly for every member of the quorum?

I justify it on the basis of the Church Handbook of Instructions that says they are to be done yearly.

I also base it on common sense -- its a pure waste of time: 3 people (EQ presidency) interviewing 40-100 people (members of the quorum) every single month? maybe you think that's reasonable - but most people do not, especially for an organisation that runs with no paid positions at the Ward or Stake level.

Edited by mnn727

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this