NO MORE HOME/VISITING TEACHING!

[Anddenex]

On 4/1/2018 at 2:32 PM, skippy740 said:

One LESS area of Pharisaical law in the Church!  I am SO in favor of this!

Although I would agree this is a great step, which I am also in favor of; however, home teaching and visiting teaching were never "Pharisaical law." Home teaching, according to President Benson was to be accepted as if Christ issued the "assignment" himself. Home teaching was a great practice according to doctrine, and this new practice if you look will still assign Elders and High Priests to families who they will have a responsibility to minister to. We are moving toward a higher law now, of the same principle, with a new practice to accomplish what Christ has been asking us to do since home teaching was instituted by the Lord, not Pharisees.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Anddenex

[Guest]

On 4/1/2018 at 7:36 PM, Suzie said:

Well, it was coming...

And I think one (if not the major factor) is that the members always struggled with it. For years and years. Like we need some training sessions from Jehovah Witnesses.

I really have no idea what this means.  Can anyone help me?

[seashmore]

6 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I really have no idea what this means.  Can anyone help me?

JW's will knock on your door and chat about God for as long as you'll let them.
(At least, that's my guess at explaining it.)

[Sunday21]

7 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I really have no idea what this means.  Can anyone help me?

Me also! What on earth?

[seashmore]

11 hours ago, MormonGator said:

My thoughts as well. If you don't show up to do your VT/HT, a change (even a massive one) in how it operates won't really do much. 

I disagree, mostly because I'm a notoriously awful VT.  I hate trying to arrange three schedules for one visit, for one.  I also get uncomfortable with conversations revolving around "I need to come visit with you because I am assigned to come visit with you," both initiating and receiving.  The functional tone of the teaching programs was to teach first, serve later.  I am confident and hopeful that the tone of the ministering program will be to serve first, teach later.  Personally, I am looking forward to encouraging our members to say, "Hey, let me know when Johnny has a game and I'll come cheer for him."  Yes, I am aware that this could be done before, but I am excited that the push is to become involved in the lives of our assigned families rather than just making sure we show up at their house.  Also, I think the tonal shift makes it easier to fulfill the calling without the accompaniment of a companion, something I always felt awkward about because I hardly ever got along with my companions.  (Or if I did, our schedules didn't.)

And I am most definitely excited about taking the issuing of assignments more seriously!  I saw it all the time, both while giving and receiving the slip, where that stupid slip of paper gets shoved into a bag and forgotten about.  Until you give your bag the annual clearing out and wonder which slip is your current assignment.  I imagine that, with the reporting interviews being quarterly, many leaderships will do them on a rotating basis.  Three months in each quarter, so interview one third of the companionships each month and you'll have a pretty good handle on that aspect of it.  (At least, that's what I would do based on my limited understanding.)

My whole adult life, those I consider my best VTs were the ones that asked me out to lunch or invited me over to their home to work on a church-related project.  The ones who were inconsiderate of my time put a bad taste in my mouth for the program.  The best HTs I had were the ones who acknowledged I have no PH holder in my home and made sure I knew I could call them for a blessing.  So, you know, the ones who ministered.

But let's talk about incorporating the youth.  What are the details on that?  How does that jive with the new two-deep leadership policy for youth interactions?  Will youth minister brothers and sisters always and/or automatically be assigned with parents?  What about youth with inactive/nonmember parents?  Homes where the youth to parent gender ratio is uneven (single mom with two boys 14+ or a family with three between 14 and 17)?  Will they be given opportunities to be assigned families? 

[estradling75]

18 minutes ago, seashmore said:

But let's talk about incorporating the youth.  What are the details on that?  How does that jive with the new two-deep leadership policy for youth interactions?  Will youth minister brothers and sisters always and/or automatically be assigned with parents?  What about youth with inactive/nonmember parents?  Homes where the youth to parent gender ratio is uneven (single mom with two boys 14+ or a family with three between 14 and 17)?  Will they be given opportunities to be assigned families? 

The young men have (or should have) been involved with Home Teaching.  I got both my sons as companions.  When my oldest came of age I took him.  When my middle son came of age he became my companion (and still is) and my oldest became companions with a member of the young men's leadership.  With permission of my families my son's always gave the lesson/spiritual thought.  This allowed the families to both serve and be served this generally worked out well even if the message was a bit scattered or a bit off as they learned by doing.

With it being Father and Son two deep is not an issue.. beyond that dynamic I do not know how the two deep will work

Edited April 3, 2018 by estradling75

[mirkwood]

I've been doing my HT for over a decade this way.  Hopefully people will catch the vision of what the ministering format means.

 

I have had exactly one PPI about home teaching.  It was rather entertaining, at least for me, not the EQ counselor.  I got lectured for about 5 minutes on how I needed to HT and visit my families and blah blah blah.  When Bro. Holier than thou paused for a breath I asked him, "you know I've had a 100% for the last 3 years right?"  His expression and spluttering were priceless.

[Anddenex]

On 4/1/2018 at 6:36 PM, Suzie said:

Well, it was coming...

And I think one (if not the major factor) is that the members always struggled with it. For years and years. Like we need some training sessions from Jehovah Witnesses.

Well, if memory suits me and the Jehovah Witnesses from my mission was correct, their witnessing was attached to their membership. If they did not go, they would be brought under disciplinary council. I assume if we attached a disciplinary council to ministering (even our previously retired home teaching and visiting teaching) more people might have actually left their home instead of complaining about a simple visit.

[zil]

13 hours ago, seashmore said:

And I am most definitely excited about taking the issuing of assignments more seriously!

(NOTE: This will sound challenging / confrontational.  It's not meant to.  It's meant to ask serious logistical questions.  I'm using your comments as a way to explore general issues / attitudes that are common in RS - from what I've seen.)

Excited enough that when a change needs to be made, and someone calls to set a half hour appointment with a member of the RSP, that you'll accept that appointment?  Even though it's only been a month since your last interview?  Ask the men how well attendance is at PPIs.  I hope people catch the spirit and accept these appointments (and the extras, because there is no way to limit changes to assignments to only once a quarter), but the responses I've already seen to requests to return and report tell me this will not be all puppy dogs and unicorns.  Everyone already asserts that they are too busy for pretty much anything you ask of them.

13 hours ago, seashmore said:

I saw it all the time, both while giving and receiving the slip, where that stupid slip of paper gets shoved into a bag and forgotten about.  Until you give your bag the annual clearing out and wonder which slip is your current assignment.

Hate to break it to you, but you're still going to get a "stupid slip of paper" because that's what the software will print out - the software the RSP uses to record who are companions and who is assigned to the companionship - a massively useful tool and time-saver.  And it will still be your decision what to do with the stupid slip of paper - whether to put it in a safe place, whether to use it to create a list for yourself in LDS Tools or in your contacts app or little black book or whatever...

(And yes, it was the supervisor, coordinator, or presidency member who chose not to magnify their calling and do more than hand out a slip of paper - I tried hard to get my supervisors to understand that they have stewardships and that they were more than a call center operator, but most of them choose to be call center operators.  Generally, I distribute changes myself (depends on the nature of the change and which supervisor is involved), and I spend time talking with those sisters who will take the time to talk to me about the assignments - most won't - I expect it to be a challenge and a half to break the mechanical habits formed around VTing.)

PS: People have been begging for years and years on the LDS tech forums for the developers to make a change which lets people see their HT / VT assignments in LDS Tools.  Maybe we're a step closer to that now, maybe not (the argument has always been that people should not see them until approved by the bishop - well, I don't put them in until approved by the bishop; and as a programmer, I know full well that it's not all that hard to create and "effective date" for changes, or an approval route, so they could do it).  Anywho, a software change like this is the only (practical) way to eliminate the slips of paper.

13 hours ago, seashmore said:

But let's talk about incorporating the youth.  What are the details on that?  How does that jive with the new two-deep leadership policy for youth interactions?  Will youth minister brothers and sisters always and/or automatically be assigned with parents?  What about youth with inactive/nonmember parents?  Homes where the youth to parent gender ratio is uneven (single mom with two boys 14+ or a family with three between 14 and 17)?  Will they be given opportunities to be assigned families? 

This is a good question.  One we will doubtless discuss in Ward Council or the new RSP-EQP-Bishop meeting that's been defined.  It's my hope that the new focus and her daughter will get a sister who has thus far declined to be a VTer to be a ministering sister.  Fortunately, I've only got one family with two eligible daughters and one is graduating high school this year.  I think I'll just make them a threesome.

Edited April 3, 2018 by zil

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Well, if memory suits me and the Jehovah Witnesses from my mission was correct, their witnessing was attached to their membership. If they did not go, they would be brought under disciplinary council. I assume if we attached a disciplinary council to ministering (even our previously retired home teaching and visiting teaching) more people might have actually left their home instead of complaining about a simple visit.

Now you're talking. No HTing/ministering = excommunication!!

[anatess2]

13 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I really have no idea what this means.  Can anyone help me?

Not sure what Suzie actually meant but based on my experiences with the JWs, they are jolly happy about visiting strangers and making friendships with them.  I had 2 JW companionships - they were 2 husband and wife partners, and they loved coming to my house.  I work from home so they know I'm usually there.  They know that if I don't open the door then I'm busy or just not in the mood to talk.  Otherwise, we have a good relaxing chat about gospel stuff.  There was a day when I was still the singing time teacher when I laid out my giant "visual aids" for the Plan of Salvation on my living room floor and we chatted a bit.  One of the women told me the Apple in Eden was Sex and her husband elbowed her.  I guess he didn't want me to become uncomfortable talking about sex.  Hah hah.  Then all of a sudden they stopped coming - they used to come at least once a month but then months passed and I haven't seen them.  So, I asked my neighbor who is a JW what happened to them and she said one of them recently passed away from cancer.  I was sad.  They've become my friends.

Oh, I forgot... when we were still in the old house, JW's knocked on my door.  I didn't have much time so I asked them if they just want to leave me a pamphlet.  So they showed me their pamphlets and asked me to take the ones I'm interested in.  I was distracted and just picked the one that looked like it's about Marriages and Family.  A week later, they knocked on the door again and my husband opened the door.  He's not the most friendly person to solicitors so he said gruffly "we're not interested".  And the JW lady was so concerned, she said she was really hoping she can talk to me just for a few seconds.  And so I popped my head out the door and she asked me with great concern, "are you ok?" and I said, yes, of course why?  And she kept on giving my husband furtive glances and so then the other woman she was with came up to the door from her car and discreetly handed me a card with the number of the Woman Abuse Hotline.  Anyway, I waved at them, they left, and I was confused about the card until my husband saw the pamphlet and showed me that it was about Spousal Abuse.  Hah hah.

Edited April 3, 2018 by anatess2

[NightSG]

13 hours ago, seashmore said:

JW's will knock on your door and chat about God for as long as you'll let them.

Yup.  Even if you're naked.

[John_Pack_Lambert]

I think a big change is that some people focused on getting off the lesson, and not on connecting with the people in meaningful ways. The sad thing is that some got off lessons with very little spiritual value. However I think in my case too often I preped for hometeaching by reading the ensign and figuring out how to present that message, as opposed to trying to figure out the actual needs of my families.

[JohnsonJones]

Well, another difficulty with Home Teaching is that it takes two.  That means, you can have an exceptional Home Teacher, but if the members he is assigned to don't take the time...then there will never be a Home Teaching appointment that they are able to make.  It takes both sides to cooperate for Home Teaching to work.  This probably was not everywhere, but with the push they had to focus on inactives at times, Home Teaching percentages would go down considerably.  People got discouraged with trying to connect with people who apparently did not want Home Teachers. 

Other times, it was difficult in our busy world to get appointments that everyone could make.  There would be coordinating between three different schedules of both companions and the member family they were assigned to teach.  Compound this with multiple families and it got more difficult.  It was not that people were not trying, but that they simply could not make it work in many instances.

This new program does not set a strict regimen of needing to meet with a companion and a family once a month.  Instead, it allows one to check up and make sure that the families are taken care of, that they don't have pressing needs, and if they need more spiritual uplifting, that they know it is possible if they want it.  However, one does not need to try to schedule a set appointment or to go to specifically teach them every month.

In theory, this could allow members and those ministering them to have MORE contact, but in other ways that are more accessible in our busy day to day life.  Perhaps one will be a regular texter for someone who is ministering to newly weds, or perhaps they will be in regular contact on facebook or many other various ways people talk and discuss today. 

They then can tell the Bishopric if there are needs that are necessary for their families (perhaps a family does not have enough food for the month or some other struggle), or help out in various ways.  In addition, reporting is NOT about a strict number, but to make sure the Priesthood and RS leaders keep in contact with those they have assigned to families and make sure that people in the ward are not in need of anything and that everything is going okay in their lives.

I think it's a great way for the ideas of visiting the families and members of the ward to be updated for our modern time.

 

[zil]

41 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

This probably was not everywhere, but with the push they had to focus on inactives at times, Home Teaching percentages would go down considerably.  People got discouraged with trying to connect with people who apparently did not want Home Teachers. 

In Handbook 2, 9.5 (visiting teaching), the priority list includes simply "less-active" members.  The FAQ for the new program says this:

Quote

Highest priority is most often given to new members, less-active members who may be receptive, and others such as single parents, widows, and widowers.

I find that telling.

[Sunday21]

3 minutes ago, zil said:

In Handbook 2, 9.5 (visiting teaching), the priority list includes simply "less-active" members.  The FAQ for the new program says this:

I find that telling.

AH HA! less-active members who may be receptive  I wonder if that means some changes! I have been vt'ing a woman who has never been active that I know of certainly in the last 6 years. She has no interest in the church or religion. So...Hmm.

Is the process that we continue vt'ing as usual until told differently? And then at some point, we have an interview about our vt recipients and then receive different instructions?

Thanks!

[zil]

19 minutes ago, zil said:

In Handbook 2, 9.5 (visiting teaching), the priority list includes simply "less-active" members.  The FAQ for the new program says this:

Quote

Highest priority is most often given to new members, less-active members who may be receptive, and others such as single parents, widows, and widowers.

I find that telling.

So, question for you all - to the best of your knowledge:  In my ward, when a sister is inactive and doesn't want visiting teachers, instead of removing her from the list, we flag (mentally - the software doesn't support this) her as a "neighbor visit" and try to assign someone who lives close to her (or otherwise has a rational excuse to come in contact with her) to do what amount to "stealth visits" - no lesson, just being a good neighbor, friend, co-worker, or whatever, as best they can.

Do your wards do this?  Do you think this indicates it should change?

Similar question as @Sunday21 just asked - we have inactive sisters who allow visiting teachers, know they are visiting teachers, but don't want to talk about the Church - they just seem to like someone coming to visit them once a month (and yes, in at least some cases, that's all the contact there is).  Do we continue these visits when these sisters are explicitly not interested in Church - just in "free friends"?

Edited April 3, 2018 by zil

[zil]

4 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

Is the process that we continue vt'ing as usual until told differently? And then at some point, we have an interview about our vt recipients and then receive different instructions?

Yes, I would say continue on your current route until your leadership have a chance to make any needed adjustments or communicate further.  And yes, instead of calling / texting /whatevering to report each month, you'll meet with a presidency member quarterly to talk about those to whom you minister - your assignment may or may not change.

Edited April 3, 2018 by zil

[NeuroTypical]

You want fun times, go on splits with the bishopric, when they go and visit the "Do not contact" folk!

From memory - it tended to go like this:
"You people shouldn't be here!  I don't want any contact!"

"We try hard to respect your wishes, and you don't have home or visiting teachers, or contact you at all.  I'm just here to remind you that you'll be on our rolls as long as you wish to remain a member.   If you want to get off our rolls, [gives instructions].

"I'll do that!  I'm sick and tired of getting contacted!" [variation] "My ex-wife told you to contact me, didn't she?"

That happened maybe 3-4 times across that evening.  None of the people followed up, and are possibly still on the rolls of the church to this day.  We asked one fellow (who had been ordained a deacon in the '80's), why he didn't go to church.  He looked like his mom had just asked him about his dirty magazine, and blurted out "because I don't like church to last three hours!"

My second counselor, on the drive back to the church, quipped "Look, here's a resignation letter, and here's a tithing slip.  Just fill one of them out and mail it to us.  We don't even care which one!".   (He wasn't serious about not caring, of course.  He had just given up his entire evening to drive around and get yelled at by people he was trying to care about.)

Edited April 3, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Sunday21]

8 hours ago, NightSG said:

Yup.  Even if you're naked.

Indeed? Okay, now you have done it! I will now tell you my Manitoba story.

i was collecting donations for a cancer charity by going door to door. At one house, the gentleman of the family answered in his underwear. I was appalled but he did not miss a beat and gave a donation. A few blocks later, I approached a house with a large picture window. I opened the gate and approached the house. Inside the house, in the middle of the front room, framed by the window was a man. Hairy chest and .. not a stitch of clothing. He looked up, saw me, looked delighted and bounded towards the front door, presumably to answer the door. I turned and beat a hasty retreat. Cancer research can wait!

Edited April 3, 2018 by Sunday21

[omegaseamaster75]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

You want fun times, go on splits with the bishopric, when they go and visit the "Do not contact" folk!

From memory - it tended to go like this:
"You people shouldn't be here!  I don't want any contact!"

"We try hard to respect your wishes, and you don't have home or visiting teachers, or contact you at all.  I'm just here to remind you that you'll be on our rolls as long as you wish to remain a member.   If you want to get off our rolls, [gives instructions].

"I'll do that!  I'm sick and tired of getting contacted!" [variation] "My ex-wife told you to contact me, didn't she?"

That happened maybe 3-4 times across that evening.  None of the people followed up, and are possibly still on the rolls of the church to this day.  We asked one fellow (who had been ordained a deacon in the '80's), why he didn't go to church.  He looked like his mom had just asked him about his dirty magazine, and blurted out "because I don't like church to last three hours!"

My second counselor, on the drive back to the church, quipped "Look, here's a resignation letter, and here's a tithing slip.  Just fill one of them out and mail it to us.  We don't even care which one!".   (He wasn't serious about not caring, of course.  He had just given up his entire evening to drive around and get yelled at by people he was trying to care about.)

I am not a believer in a do not contact list, our previous bishopric threw the list out.  Basically if your on the rolls your going to get visited. If you don't want to be a member anymore we will instruct you on how to take care of it.  What we discovered is that some of the people on the list had moved and we were able to clean up the roster. 

[NightSG]

5 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

I opened the gate and approached the house. Inside the house, in the middle of the front room, framed by the window was a man. Hairy chest and .. not a stitch of clothing. He looked up, saw me, looked delighted and bounded towards the front door, presumably to answer the door. I turned and beat a hasty retreat. Cancer research can wait!

I haven't quite managed what a friend did; after answering the door in nothing but black socks and a cowboy hat, (he swears it wasn't intentional, but for some reason in his freshly awakened and very hung over state, he knew something was missing and for some reason his brain picked socks and a hat) and listening to them for a few minutes, he politely did the "step aside a bit" hand gesture without interrupting their monologue, and peed off the porch between them.  He says it was just about the time he finished that he finally realized he didn't have anything to pull up afterward, and started piecing together that his sleepy, still somewhat drunk brain had somehow transposed "hat" and "sweatpants."

I still wish I could remember the Demerol moment with my old neighbor, but I can only go by the evidence that I did plenty of other complex tasks fully competently (I even washed the dishes and cleaned up the stove) while totally blacked out for three days, so answering the door and having a normal conversation with her while totally and quite casually naked is entirely plausible.  The part that's slightly disturbing is that I obviously also took the trash out at least once, down two flights of stairs, and about 60 yards across the parking lot to the dumpster and then walked back to the apartment...and the clothes I brought home from the hospital were the last things in the hamper...and the hospital gown I wore home was apparently in that load of trash.

[NeuroTypical]

Ok wow. Often I have cool stories to share on whatever topic people are discussing.  But fortunately, my encounters with inappro-pro nekkidness is limited.  

[John_Pack_Lambert]

On 4/3/2018 at 2:54 PM, Sunday21 said:

AH HA! less-active members who may be receptive  I wonder if that means some changes! I have been vt'ing a woman who has never been active that I know of certainly in the last 6 years. She has no interest in the church or religion. So...Hmm.

Is the process that we continue vt'ing as usual until told differently? And then at some point, we have an interview about our vt recipients and then receive different instructions?

Thanks!

I interpreted "receptive" as those who are OK with being visited, so if you have someone who proactievly says they do not want visits, you do not prioritize them. I've actually been in a branch where those who did not come to Church were made low priority home teaching contacts. If this was wise I cannot say.

[John_Pack_Lambert]

On 4/3/2018 at 8:03 PM, omegaseamaster75 said:

I am not a believer in a do not contact list, our previous bishopric threw the list out.  Basically if your on the rolls your going to get visited. If you don't want to be a member anymore we will instruct you on how to take care of it.  What we discovered is that some of the people on the list had moved and we were able to clean up the roster. 

My Dad at one point had a woman's lawyer call him up and threaten prosecution if he continued to try to contact her to do hometeaching. 

 

On the other hand, contrary to some claims, it is harder to join the Church than to leave. You have to meet multiple times with the missionaries, come to Church a few times, at least say you will change your life, at least claim to be living the law of chastity and word of wisdom (I know some people who lied through their teeth when they told the missionaries that, but that is a different story), and sit through a baptismal service, then come to Church a week later to be confirmed. To leave you just have to fill out and mail in a paper. 

 

The thing having your name removed from the records of the Church is actually harder than is not doing anything.