This morning, I watched the Church's Love, Share, Invite broadcast. The broadcast can be found here. I found this broadcast to be one of the most fascinating and unusual broadcasts I have ever seen in the Church. Here are reasons why I think this:
- The entire broadcast was on member-missionary work, and it was not about referring others to the full-time missionaries, preparing members for full-time missionary service, or how full-time missionaries should do missionary work
- The focus was on children, youth, and young single adults doing missionary work, not older adults, families, or full-time missionaries doing missionary work
- Addressing rejection of member invitations in missionary work
- The need to continue to share the Gospel even if previous efforts seem unsuccessful
- Avoiding pressuring others or using methods that are not natural to share the Gospel
- No talks given as part of the broadcast by Church leaders - just commentary and testimonies
- A brief interview with the parents of a convert who disagreed with their child's decision to join the Church and who have not since joined the Church, but who later noted a positive change in their son's life
- The implicit message that we, as a Church, need to change our culture to be more effective missionaries in regards to how we interact with those who are not members of the Church
Elder Bednar provided many quotes that hit right on the mark of the problems the Church has had with its lack of worldwide effectiveness and progress with its missionary program, namely that the culture in the Church has been such that missionary work has been seen as something just full-time missionaries do for 18 months or two years rather than it being a part of lifelong discipleship. This attitude neutralizes missionary efforts for almost the entire duration of the average member's life. First, Elder Bednar stated, "Love, Share, and Invite should not be seen as the Church's new program for sharing the Gospel," and rather he emphasized that the purpose of the broadcast was "fundamental Gospel principles that we are reemphasizing." He emphasized that missionary work should "become a natural expression of genuine love." The need to totally reshape member attitudes about missionary was highlighted when he said we should "not talk about missionary work as a discrete and separate activity that some of do some of the time," and instead it should become an "integral permanent part of our daily lives." Ultimately, Elder Bednar emphasized "Church leaders will no longer have to ask members to add sharing the Gospel to their already lengthy list of things to do" once Church culture to conform to these standards. Elder Uchtdorf also highlighted this need by stating missionary work must use "normal and in natural ways" in order to "invite people to come and see, come and help, and come and belong." Another implicit message from the broadcast was that these changes need to happen with the Church's leaders around the world first if there is any hope that change is to happen to the main body of active membership in the Church. In other words, the leaders need to lead by example and not just occupy some type of managerial role in supervising and cheering on those under their stewardship.
I was also pleased to see that this broadcast directly addressed some of the points mentioned in my blog post from February 25th, 2019 entitled The Urgent Need to Reform the Missionary Program. It is quite concerning that the culture about member-missionary work in the Church has been such that it seems most members do not know how to to do it. I believe this has arisen due to a combination of factors which I have seen through the data I have collected as well as my own personal experiences. First, the high-pressured tactics and quota-driven approaches to missionary work, which began to be implemented in the early 1960s in the United Kingdom, eventually spread to most areas of the Church, and this has resulted in members usually only referring people to the missionaries if they are confident that these individuals are ready to join the Church or are able to be comfortable with such pressure. Thus, the negative relationship between members and full-time missionaries often appears to be the result of concerns whether full-time missionary efforts are motivated by secondary gain (i.e., reaching a goal to have X many baptisms) or genuine concern for the well-being of the individuals involved in their missionary efforts. Second, active Latter-day Saints in many areas of the world develop their own sub-culture in the area and tend to spend much of their socialization with fellow active members. This results in fewer opportunities to associate with "non-members" and can also result in greater anxiety about interacting with those "outside the Church" due to differences in culture, practices, and beliefs. Third, many members of the Church are afraid of rejection or offending others. These members may lack sufficient member-missionary skills and/or had negative or unsuccessful past experiences sharing the Gospel. Fourth, missionary work has long since been something done by full-time missionaries for a discrete period of time rather than something expected to occur on an everyday basis (a point I mentioned earlier). One of the main points driven in the broadcast was for members of the Church to invite others to activities they are already doing - whether they were official Church activities or social gatherings or activities. Although the broadcast is a major step in the right direction, it will probably take many years, or perhaps decades, for there to be an effective shift in culture in the Church in most areas to try to effectively adopt these principles. Efforts to deliberately change culture are not easy, and sometimes these efforts can even backfire. However, the research I have conducted, and the messages shared in the broadcast today, make it clear that a change is warranted nonetheless for there to be any type of measurable improvement in missionary efforts, and these measurable improvements will ultimately be reflected at some point by the statistical data published by the Church.
Finally, I am interested in your thoughts, comments, opinions, and observations. Please provide your comments on what you noticed about the broadcast and its potential impact with the Church's missionary efforts.
30 comments:
I find that I have tons more "missionary moments" in my service in scouting than when even during my church calling as ward missionary leader. Why? Because in scouting I became deeply immersed with the local community (people not of my faith) in activities that highly reflect this attitude of Loving your Neighbor. What activities do regular church members do on a daily basis that reflect this?
Confirmed yesterday on Classic Maps, the Ipomeia Brazil District, has been consolidated with the neighboring, Lages Brazil Stake.
Like the message. Missionary work needs to be based on people wanting to share for the benefit and well being of others rather than to check boxes or meet a goal. On my mission saw the best success was new converts sharing what they learned and had because of what it brought them.
I like your analysis and comments. I don't know that it is a change so much as it is adjustment. A good many of your points I have been saying because the church leaders have been saying it. In fact, on my mission 20 years ago, I rejected the idea of purely counting numbers for success. Ironically, that was in England. Missionaries in Nebraska Omaha Mission have been working with members properly. Unfortunately, I know people who don't like to do missionary work this current way.
I find it significant that it focused on youth and younger. In the last 15+ years, the Lord has used the young people to train us "old' people. I can give examples, but would go on for too long.
I was very much loving the broadcast. There is a need for genuine love in our actions and activities. I have to admit that as a Michigan-born resident of Deteout who grew up feeling out of place because I was not rooted in the area in a multi-generational way like so many of my classmates and teachers I have often wondered if we under-value being rooted in an area and place.
I think this will be a great first step but there will need to be a lot more.
Hello again, everyone! Matt, thanks for this report. I agree with others who have already commented here on the broadcast: The idea that we as regular Church members need to be actively engaged in missionary work is not a new one. It was David O. McKay who coined the phrase "Every member a missionary." Further, Elder David A. Bednar, who had previously underscored the importance of Church members becoming missionaries before they go on missions, shared the following insights during the April 2008 General Conference:
"We properly pray for the safety and success of the full-time missionaries throughout the world. And a common element in many of our prayers is a request that the missionaries will be led to individuals and families who are prepared to receive the message of the Restoration. But ultimately it is my responsibility and your responsibility to find people for the missionaries to teach. Missionaries are full-time teachers; you and I are full-time finders. And you and I as lifelong missionaries should not be praying for the full-time missionaries to do our work!"
With these teachings from President McKay and Elder Bednar in mind, what we see in the recent worldwide broadcast in terms of Church members being counseled to take a greater role in missionary work is basically a reiteration of what Church leaders have been trying to encourage members to do anyways. The recent reemphasis of previouslyy-offered counsel in this respect brings to mind the talk given by Elder Jeffrey R. Holland during the Priesthood Session of the October 2016 General Conference:
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2016/10/emissaries-to-the-church?lang=eng
In that talk, Elder Holland mentioned how effective home teaching should be done through reliance on the Spirit to meet the needs of those to whom each companionship is assigned. As we know, 18 months after Elder Holland gave those remarks, he, along with Relief Society General President Sister Jean B. Bingham, were asked to provided context into the announcemnt during the Sunday Afternoon Session that home and visiting teaching would be retired in favor of ministering.
With that example in mind, again, the reiteration of the fact that missionaries should be full-time teachrs and that Church members should be full-time findersn seems to be a reminder from the Lord htrough the counsel offered by these leaders that the future success of missionary efforts in the worldwide Church will only be truly assured to the extent that we as Church members take seriously our obligations to find people for the missionaries to teach. And the fact that these reminders keep being shared seems to alsoo indicate an urgency felt at the general level that the very success of the Church going forward will depend primarily on that.
That being said, I wanted to follow up on what I mentioned a couple of times in the previous thread. The Church News has now twice reiterated that Elder Uchtdorf is concluding a 3-year assignment as Chairamn of the Missionary Executive Council, but has not given any indication in any subsequent coverage regarding who is replacing Elder Uchtdorf and which other apostles are now or will soon be serving on the Missionary Executive Council.
That being said, the only apostles from whom Seminar teachings have not yet been covered are Elders Quentin L. Cook, Ronald A. Rasband, Gerrit W. Gong, and Ulisses Soares. So I have a huch that those four members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are now serving on the Missionary Executive Councill.
Hopefully subsequent coverage will shed ore light on this matter. For now, my thanks once again to you all.
I think these are all great things to address, but I'm afraid an attempt at changing culture without real STRUCTURAL change will prove fruitless.
The current culture is a result of the structure imposed in the Church. An emphasis on full-time missionary work has natural consequences. A hashtag social media campaign is naturally going to lead to "fake," unnatural proselytizing.
Shifting the culture is going to be doubly difficult in a world that is increasingly insular in nature. Chance meetings with neighbors and others are rarer than they used to be, so the Church would have to provide some incentives for people to make the extra effort to upend an entire cultural norm.
I am left wondering what more the church wants from me.
I work all day, I end my work day physically tired and mentally exhausted.
I make a meal, eat, study the scriptures, and am ready to go to bed. But inevitably there is a service need in the ward. There is a meeting with a church leader to council together. There is a week day church activity. There is a weekend church activity. There is service in the temple as patrons and as temple worker. I have filled my days with good, better, and best things, on top of doing the basics. I am only able to do all these things because Christ sustains me in doing his work. I dont have kids and stand in awe of those who manage to do all of the above and also raise up righteous children.
All the attempts to go out of my way to share my faith with others have been rejected. The best cases respect my faith while saying it isnt for them. They arent willing to give up their sins, and pretty open about it.
I guess others have different circumstances where they interact with mostly non members and have plenty of opportunity to be prompted to share truth and invite.
Maybe I should start telling my leaders I cant serve in the church, I need to have room in my schedule to socialize with the community and my neighbors so I can eventually naturally share the gospel with them.
Maybe I am not the intended audience for this member missionary culture change. Maybe I am. I dont know.
If you look around Facebook, you can now find the mission Facebook pages in your area, areas with multiple sets of missionaries in different parts of it may have one each for the larger cities, if not more.
Story after story exists of people responding and within literally as little as ten minutes in cases they have been talking with missionaries online.
Other benefits from most online activities have been more time to teach, forget the traffic, hitting every last red light, etc., and more teaching rather than hitting doors and maybe one in a given hour or two talking to them.
But old school things still have their place, a mission president was in a larger airport, and he had his tag on, waiting to go through TSA. A woman saw it and ran up and asked him if he was a missionary, he said yes, and she asked if he had anything. He gave her a copy of the Book of Mormon and a pass-along card, and she ran back where she caame from with those. I think she was waiting with family to check in at the counter for a different flight.
I mostly agree with the analysis you provided in the blog post. As a lemma of sorts to your points, I think the important implication tying them all together is that successful missionary work depends not just on the relationship between lay members and their friends or between full-time missionaries and investigators, but between members and full-time missionaries. When Elder Jackson of the 70 was my mission president, he emphasized building relationships with members; he asked us to spend lots of time with members, teaching them, socializing with them, and gaining their trust and friendship, and in addition to the key indicators the church required, he asked us to report lessons taught to members as a key indicator each week. His view was that even if our other key indicators suffered initially as a result of the reallocation of our time, once members trusted us to teach their friends effectively and respectfully, all the other key indicators would follow. I admit I was initially skeptical, but he was right. The success of the companionships that most consistently followed that advice was amazing, with more and higher quality baptisms resulting even though most of the numbers missionaries are too often pushed to obsess over (new investigators, lessons taught, etc.) were mediocre.
As I think about my own hesitations in regards to sharing the gospel with people I know, this makes sense. Aside from the barrier of "I don't think I know this person well enough to talk to them about the gospel without it being weird", the other major hurdles are "will the missionaries be effective teachers?" and "will the missionaries prematurely push baptism?" Having missionaries teach members the lessons helps members feel confident in the teaching abilities of the missionaries, and hopefully models good teaching methods the members can adapt and use themselves when appropriate. Having missionaries spend time with members helps build relationships between the members and missionaries, which leads members (usually correctly, I think) to feel that the missionaries will then be less likely to use high pressure sales tactics that would jeopardize the members relations with their investigator friends.
That leads to your comment on change needing to be driven by the example of leaders. While I think you are probably mostly thinking of local leaders (Bishops, Stake Presidents, etc. inviting their friends to activities, church etc.), I would suggest that 70s (general authority and area) also need to make some changes -- we had at least one 70 who visited the mission I served in insist that we should invite people to be baptized every single time we meet them, beginning with the first interaction. I hated that as a missionary, and I would be very upset as a member if full-time missionaries took that tack with a friend I introduced to them. I'm not sure if it is a result of a lot of 70s coming from business backgrounds, or being very alpha, driven, type A personalities or what, but that is a major barrier to successful collaboration between members and full-time missionaries emanating from church leaders.
One final barrier to effective member missionary work I experience is that most non-members I know are through work, and at least in my workplace it would not be appropriate to try to share the gospel at work; probably the takeaway is I should seek to become friends with my co-workers in settings outside of work, which in addition to making new friends (a good thing in and of itself!) might in some cases eventually lead to opportunities to share the gospel.
Also on the topic of missionary work in the modern world:
I read this article today (https://mercatornet.com/the-turning-tide-of-intellectual-atheism/72999/), and I believe this will be a growing and important trend to which the church needs to adapt. I have a surprising number of agnostic or atheist friends who in the past few years have started attending church because, although they can't bring themselves to believe (at least not yet!) the more literal truth claims of the church such as the actual, not just metaphorical, reality of things like the atonement, revelation, etc. they view religion as important for society in the ways outlined in the article, and feel that our church is especially good at producing outcomes they care about (stable families, valuing child-bearing and child-rearing, avoidance of substance abuse, mutual aid (ie church welfare system), close-knit community (which can be a weakness in terms of our reaching out to others outside our congregations, but is also a strength in other respects and something many people want in their lives), rejection of the cult of hedonism permeating modern life, and so on.
I mentioned my friends are attending wards near where they live to a counselor in the bishopric of the ward I am in, and his reaction was befuddlement, or even perhaps incomprehension, at the idea that atheists would attend church. I think that pretty well encapsulates the church's lack of preparation for welcoming, befriending, and teaching atheists in general. The initial epistemic focus when teaching atheists is rather different from when teaching Christians (or even the "spiritual but not religious" types). Praying in faith is not so strange to a person who already holds some sort of spiritual view. For an atheist, a sincere prayer seeking confirmation of truth (and even coming to terms in themselves with their desire to believe) is a daunting and/or absurd notion, and overcoming that requires first helping them to understand how the subjective sources of gospel knowledge (personal experiences with the Spirit) can in fact be valid sources of knowledge that can work in tandem with objectively obtained knowledge (which is the only sort that most people who have grown up in a profoundly materialist scientific epistemology are comfortable with). I believe the only way we as a church will be able to successfully engage with them and help them grow spiritually from square one is if we really internalize Alma 32 ourselves -- we need to be much more comfortable with statements of "I believe", "I desire to believe", and "I choose to believe" and the like, both from those around us and in ourselves. I think we need to more fully acknowledge and embrace (and then teach our atheist and agnostic friends) that faith and belief are -- as is true of all virtues -- a choice, and that believing doesn't require being blind to the reasons to disbelieve, but rather means weighing the reasons for belief and disbelief and then letting that "desire to believe" that Alma talks about provide the impetus for a leap of faith, a first step in the journey of faith found in Alma 32. They already see the fruits of the experiment and just need help coming to terms with the notion that it is a valid experiment.
I understand you
I think it sends a mixed and, to be frank, not entirely convincing message to focus on growth and baptisms as much as we have for so long and claim at the same time that we don't really care whether people get baptized or not. How feasible is it in practice for most people to share the gospel without particularly hoping that the person they share with gets baptized, and not be disappointed if/when that doesn't happen? Especially when we continue to hold up conversion stories and baptism rates in various developing countries to make ourselves feel good and confirm to ourselves that the Church is true. Maybe next time they should skip the converts altogether and interview former investigators who decided not to be baptized but nonetheless have positive feelings toward the Church.
I wish leaders would address a couple of elephants in the room that the average missionary, whether member or full-time, is inadequately prepared to deal with. These things hold me back from missionary work far more than any generalized "fear of rejection".
1. The overwhelming majority of young people in secular countries believe that same-sex marriage is every bit as legitimate as opposite-sex marriage, that transgender people should express themselves and be referred to as the gender with which they identify, and that women should have access to all the same rights, privileges, and positions as men. These are among the highest reasons for people leaving the Church and surely among the highest reasons for others not wishing to join it in the first place.
2. Anyone with internet access can, and often does, at the click of a button find hundreds of criticisms of church history, theology, and practice that most members know little or nothing about. I know that many investigators stop meeting with missionaries for this very reason, and the missionaries usually can't do anything about it.
I wish church leaders would give prospective missionaries, whether member or full-time, at least some general guidelines on anticipating and dealing with these problems instead of acting like they don't exist. I know they know they exist because Elder Kevin W. Pearson discussed them at the 2018 FairMormon Conference (continued in another comment due to the character limit):
[/Quote]
Pretend you are John, a 23-year-old socially conscious recent graduate beginning your career on the east coast. As you move on to the next stage in life, you begin thinking about spirituality. The missionaries contact you, and you agree to meet with them. You have an engaging and enlightening discussion with them in your apartment and agree to meet again soon. You subsequently mention this to a good friend who warns you that Mormons are racist. Curious and intrigued, you obviously google it.
As you review the results of your search, you see that there must be some truth to this, based on the nature of the results:
“The new face of Mormon racism”
“The History of Racism and White Supremacy in the Mormon Church”
“Racism in the Mormon Church”
Just to name a few.
These results all look interesting, but, you’re really not that interested in reading a bunch of articles. You would rather watch a video. So, you switch to YouTube and do the same search.
Again, there seems to be a lot content on the issue, but nothing from the Church itself. The HuffPost entry appears first, so you click on the Huffpost video.
This is your first exposure to the fact that, for a time, the priesthood was not conferred upon black men. A list of other suggested videos on the topic appear to be somewhat consistent. Wanting to give the missionaries the benefit of the doubt (which rarely happens), you take the pass along card they left and type in Mormon.org.
The results on Mormon.org show a complete blank on the issue and you begin to wonder why you found so much on the google and YouTube search. Still curious, you use the “ask a friend” option on Facebook, where you quickly get lost in a sea of blogs.
Even if you were amazingly persistent and somehow found lds.org, you may only find a very recent blog post on Healing the Wounds of Racism, but not the Gospel Topics essay written on this topic or any Church Newsroom articles. Good content often does exist, but it can be very difficult to find, and often does not address key questions in consistent and engaging ways.
We have failed John in this scenario. Missionaries confront scenarios like this every single day, in every language in the world. Now, not all topics are this problematic, and, in fact, this scenario may look much different today with the recent ‘Be One’ celebration that took place on June 1 of this year. We need to create and promote content that effectively communicates what we believe and why in clear, authentic and engaging ways, especially on some of the most prevalent search topics. Too often our content uses words and expressions completely unfamiliar to those outside the Church. We don’t need a deep doctrinal dive to address basic questions....
Research indicates that most misunderstanding about the Church can be tied to a relatively few key topics like:
Church History, Temples, Garments, Joseph Smith, Polygamy, Prophets, Women, LGBT, and Transparency just to name a few obvious ones. As you might imagine, each of these core topics has a myriad of related subtopics. As you might suspect, racism, the focus of our scenario with John, is one of these topics. Information, both positive and negative, about these topics are accessed through search engines and on YouTube. These platforms are the primary sources of information in our time. We simply need more effective, engaging, and faithful content in more languages and cultures that can be easily found on these platforms – content that clearly communicates what we believe and why it is important in a positive and personal way. The Church can’t possibly produce all the content needed. We need your help and your voices. Are you starting to see the magnitude of this challenge?
[/Close Quote]
Why don't we hear counsel like this in General Conference, or in the most recent broadcast, or other venues where a lot more members would actually become aware of and benefit from it? Okay, sure, people are converted by the Spirit, but you can't expect them to give the Spirit a chance, to take time out of their lives to give serious consideration to one religion out of tens of thousands, if you can't address their initial concerns and questions first.
I like what the Kansas City Saints are doing this month for missionary work. This is a great example of "Love, Share, Invite"... and showcases the best stuff of your religion too. https://p.facebook.com/KansasCityTempleRun/
I wonder if the one and only new Mission that was scheduled this year will be organized tomorrow as planned.
The "Mozambique Beira Mission" under the direction of "Nilson J. Moraes, 56, and Keila Moraes, three children, Jardim Atlântico Ward, Florianópolis Brazil Stake: Mozambique Beira Mission.", that was originally planned to begin 1 year ago and rescheduled for this year 2021.
https://www.thechurchnews.com/global/2019-11-21/missions-lds-mormon-brazil-texas-ecauador-ethiopia-167641
https://www.thechurchnews.com/callings/2021-02-21/new-mission-presidents-companions-philippines-barbados-thailand-brazil-china-hong-kong-canada-cambodia-203985
@Danny
It sounds like from your description that you're doing everything you're supposed to and that the Lord expects you to. It doesn't sound to me like you're falling short, though you might feel like it (and believe me, as someone with chronic depression, I get that way, too).
I think the Lord takes each of us under His wing in each of our own unique circumstances and situations. If you're sharing the gospel from time to time with others within the opportunities available to you, then you're doing exactly what you're supposed to - you're giving them the opportunity. It's up to them to make the decision to act on your good example or not.
I wrote a few paragraph response that did not publish.
I noted that attempts as a ward missionary were sometimes fruitless because other members did not follow up, like a newer member (convert of 3-4 years) did not reach out to a mutual neighbor with a convert prospect when I asked her; she died suddenly last year and the neighbors did not know her. I thought her influence would have helped that family feel more loved and influence for membership, but sadly it did not happen. She was a great member, however. Again, we all lived mere doors from each other.
My wife has had a coworker go to church with her recently. Normally my wife is really good friends with non members; occasionally they come to some of our events, or simply family gatherings.
It is hard to find the time to be an active friend and example to bring others to Christ. It requires faith and love and hope. I understand how many of the commenters feel.
There was a period of time during my divorce that I became friends with a Baptist woman. She was more fundamentalist in nature, shared her love and knowledge without conditions, and lived her belief in Christ through her service and kindness to others.
It wasn't hard to be drawn to her for what she had inside. Unfortunately, we couldn't reconcile the baptist/lds differences, but she did much more than members of the church during my time of need.
The honest, HONEST! service and compassion for one another works wonders!
As an old institute instructor used to say, "We need to smell more smoke in our chapels." I think many are intimidated by the strict dress code as they enter our buildings. Not that we shouldn't dress our best, but sometimes, we need to be able to reach out to others without our clothing being the first thing they see as a hurdle to overcome. Doing that requires GENUINE care, friendship and compassion... as well as a TIME to spend with them, knowing that you really care, and have something to share with them, and are willing to listen (and not judge) to them as well.
There were/are people that won't associate with nonmembers who smoke, knew 20 years ago of a case in Eagle Mountain.
But then, a cigarette or the smell of one was a clue you might be abke to offer one of the pass-along cards introduced two years earlier and found effective in tests in Mesa AZ and the east valley in general, and Houston TX. I first saw them when I was in a PEC/Welfare meeting of that time, and the bishop had received one package each of the two that were out then, four more were introduced months later. Between then and my stroke in 2016 I believe I gave out 2,200 cards, nost were garden variety but I did have a few interesting ones. How about one at 130am to a man after talking about the Plan of Salvation? That happened in Las Vegas, the 4 Queens on Fremont Street was in front of me.
How many people lived in Eagle Mountain twenty years ago?
I was a ward missionary at least half of the 2010s. My ward in Virginia fellowshipped and baptized some really good people, some made it to the temple. We had some long term investigator/ friends who never joined but good relationships developed, and who knows down the line? We activated some good people, too, seeing them go to the temple.
A few people fell away. Sad to see.
In Australia and New Zealand, social norms of a coffee, or tea and the occasional drink is a blocker. A faith with a strong American flavour is a blocker. An inward looking organisation with little or no grassroots community outreach or programs is a blocker. Buildings and programs that have a distinct American 1960's design and feel is a blocker. Add to that a growing non affiliation to any religious tradition is a blocker. In New Zealand that is 48.2% (2018 - up from 41.92% in 2013) and in Australia that sits at 30.1% (2016 - up from 19% in 2006.
Outside of the Mormon Corridor, there are significant social norms and blockers preventing people from actively discussing their religion in the context of missionary work. Having empty chapels the bulk of the week doesn't provide a community centre to draw people into service or activities to highlight the benefits of being part of the LDS family.
In my opinion, service projects with a service based missionary force that are then supplemented by local members is a much better use of resources. Engage people in projects and issues that the local community are passionate about and then create an environment and community where people are drawn to discuss common values. A service project on the Saturday, can naturally lead to a worship with us tomorrow conversation.
The Church has never been integrated with the local community in Australia and New Zealand, nor has it wanted to. If it wants to engage more people, the institution needs to change the way it engages with the rest of the world on a grass roots community level.
Christopher Nicholson, if you'll indulge me, I have some thoughts in response to your question as to why we don't hear things like this more frequently in General Conference. I had composed an original version of this comment for potential approval yesterday, but felt before submitting it through moderation that it needed a little work. As I reflected on what I should say (rather than what >I had originally planned on saying), my mind was drawn to Section 93 in the Doctrine and Covenants. That revelation was received during the busy period of time where the Church in Kirtland Ohio had seen the organization of the First Presidency. Although the First Presidency members were actively engaged in the work of the kingdom, they had apparently not given sufficient focus to the welfare of their families. With that background in mind, the Lord admonished the Three Presiding High Priests of the Church through the following counsel, reiterated to each of the members individually before it was directed to them as the Presiding High Priests of the Church: "First set in order thy house." The rest of the revelation indicated that the Brethren would only be successful in representing the Lord in the governance of the Church if their focus was first on setting their houses (temporal affairs) in order.
So what bearing does that have on why the counsel given in the recent "Sharing the Gospel" broadcast is not mentioned more frequently? That's a very fair question, which I will attempt to answer. One just has to look at some of the actions taken under President Nelson's leadership to realize how much he has made a clear distinction between doctrinal matters (such as the Church meeting regularly for General Conferences and weekly in congregations for Sabbath Day worship) vs. what has just been tradition that has long been kept, but perhaps not with a good reason (such as holding conference sessions targeted to the specific audiences instead of focusing fully on the conference for a growing worldwide Church, or the fact that, while Sacrament Meetings are to be held once weekly for each congregation, there is no such requirement about the frequency with which the Church members should be teaching one another from the scriptures in Sunday School, or how often priesthood Quorums and Relief Society or Young Women groups should meet, with the bulk of such learning far better and more effective when done at home as individuals or families.
Continuing my reply to Christopher Nicholson here: Drawing that clear differentiation between established doctrine vs. cultural traditions that may be good, but could be better handled, President Nelson has done much to essentially set the Church in order, primarily because he was open to considering the question of doctrinal provisions vs. traditions or cultural norms. Not that his predecessors were at fault for keeping those practices, but that there had to be a better way consistent with doctrine. So in such adjustments, the prophet has placed a clear focus on setting the Church in order. And he's been able to do that in the way that he has because when he's home or with his family, he's fully invested in that time. When he's functioning in his calling or otherwise at work on the affairs in the kingdom, his focus has been solely on that. So with his own house in order, he's been able to give more focus towards what needs to be done to more fully set the Church in order.
And the gradual steps he's taken in terms of the timing and parameters of each change has been very measured. With all of that in mind, I hope the point i'm trying to make is clear: It will be far easier for the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in our day to set things in order for the Church if the primary focus can be on correcting traditions vs. doctrinal provisions first, followed by moving the Church as appropriate towards a focus on other priorities that are no less important, but for which their success is predicated on what has been done in the lead-up to it.
Having said all of that, with none of us privy to the discussions occurring at the top levels of Church leadership, it may not be as clear how much more remains to be done to set the Church fully in proper doctrinal compliance before more complete attention can be devoted to other priorities that are certainly no less important for the Church, but are predicated on the success of the changes that have been, are being, or will yet be made. With that in mind, I suspect that only those privy to those discussions would know how much remains to be done in that respect.
Here is the final portion of my reply responding to the latest comment from Christopher Nicholson: But that being said, it will probably be infinitely easier for the Church to more fully focus on efforts to get more Church members involved in missionary work once all that may need to get the Church to that point has occurred. In the meantime, I'm gratified to see that we are far enough along in that process to at least be hearing about a renewed emphasis on member missionary work, and I feel confident that much more might be said on that subject as we get closer to the time when the Lord inspires a more complete focus on that.
Bearing in mind that these are only the thoughts and impressions that came to my mind based on what I reread in D&C 93 and on what President Nelson's timing and focus has been on the announcements that have been made, and that I make these comments as one who is definitely not privy to such discussions (and likely never will be), these are just my own observations that came to mind as I considered my response to your comment on this usse.
As a result, you, and by extension, anyone else reading this comment if/when it is approved can take this line of reasoning as valid or invalid as you see the merit (or lack thereof) in what I have attempted to lay out here. Hopefully what I have said herein will be of use to some of you who read it. My thanks once again to you all, either way.
@Christopher Nicholson
I appreciate you quoting Elder Kevin W. Pearson's talk. I think you and he are right with the points you bring up about ways in which we can change our online presence and image. I really enjoy listening to the YouTube FairMormon talks for that reason. They address all the controversial stuff.
Hopefully, someday we will see more of a marriage between our scholarly community and our public image on the official website. Until then, I think FairMormon is a great place to go to find answers to some of these more difficult questions.
@Unknown
Thanks for sharing the article about Intellectual Atheism.
It brought up a point of view that I'd never considered before. I hope other commenters and readers here get a chance to read it. I like how it brought up the fact that some atheists, whether or not they have a desire to believe the tenets of religion, are recognizing and appreciating the moral codes and structure that organized religions bring to society,
@Christopher Nicholson
Coincidentally, after my last comment to you about answering tough gospel/church history questions, I came across this video in my YouTube suggestions:
"Latter-day Saint Myths and Reality":
https://youtu.be/EfOyGTLDqjM
I remember when this promo came out. It was right before my mission and was promoted especially during the Salt Lake City Olympics. It's probably familiar to you and other readers here.
It was great having President Hinckley as the Prophet back then, because his background in media lead to building a lot of bridges through audio-visual means.
I really hope the Church website ends up making and broadcasting more updated videos or articles like this (and even creates a section for frequently asked or common questions on the main page) in order to dispel rumors and answer sincere difficult questions.
Ideally, it would be something like a mix between this video, Fair Mormon, and Meet the Mormons. With the questions coming from real people, and the answers being provided by a mix of Church leaders, LDS Scholars, well-known Church members, missionaries, and lay members.
The Church could also invest heavily into SEO optimization (Tagging the vids with hashtags such as #mormonpolygamy or #raceandthepriesthood, #mormonsandblacks, etc. Using the exact phrases that people are looking for (and not shying away from the controversial topics), so that these vids would at least show up as an option next to the misinformation or anti-mormon ones).
Along with the official website, they could share the vids through YouTube and Facebook, plus make people aware of the videos during General Conference and encourage them to share with those who have questions through social media. And encourage the missionaries to watch and share them with investigators when those topics come up.
The Church has been doing something similar to this with shorter animated videos on specific topics:
"Did Joseph Smith Use a Seer Stone? Now You Know":
https://youtu.be/q1esI8cbCtc
I think that's a good start, and I hope they make more of them (even a different topic each week or month or so), and make them more visible on the main page like you and Elder Pearson suggested.
Hopefully, since Elder Pearson is aware of this issue (and as you suggested, other general authorities are, too), this topic will continue to be brought up and addressed in the leadership councils.
And hopefully, as he suggested, we lay members will continue to create content that supplements what the leadership comes up with.
I think we need to change the words we use, similar to Ministering vs Home/Visiting Teaching. Instead of always saying missionary work, we need to say Gathering Israel.
That change in vocabulary shifts the focus from the missionaries to those of us as regular members who have made covenants during baptism and in the temple. We are to be actively engaged in gathering Israel.
Post a Comment