Reducing Time And Money Commitments For Members

[rongo]

I'm looking for recent quotes, from the CHI or other sources, exhorting priesthood leaders to reduce and simplify activities and to rein in time and money commitments for members. I have the really, really good ones from 1990, when Church policy was drastically changed, but that was 22 years ago. I know I've read some since then, and wanted to draw upon the collective mind here to find some good, more recent ones.

My stake is worse than normal at having tons and tons of extraneous meetings and activities, and I've been told by the stake presidency and stake leaders for the last four years that they will address this in the next year's calendar (to absolutely no avail). I have told concerned members of my ward who feel guilty to follow their conscience when they have expressed concerns about burdensome and oppressive meetings and activities they are supposed to go to. Last week, two other bishops in the stake (independent from me) and a young women's president complained, and this got their attention, although there was a lot of defensiveness and denial.

I wasn't even aware of last week's "uprising" until a counselor in the stake presidency forwarded emails to a large group of stake and ward leaders in an effort to justify things. Here are the quotes (from President Hinckley, Monson, and Packer in 1990) I added to the fray, and these are the types of things I'm looking for (but more recent):

-------

("Now, there will be smaller budgets and fewer activities, fewer programs. That will leave a vacuum. Nothing likes a vacuum. We must resist the temptation to program that vacuum").

President Packer: “While we all seem to agree that . . . over-programming, is a critically serious problem, we have failed to reduce [programs and activities]. It has been virtually impossible to affect any reduction in programs. Each time we try, advocates cry to high heaven that we are putting spiritual lives . . . at risk . . . [and] we program even heavier doses of interviews, activities, meetings, and assessments . . .”

President Packer: “Some of you have asked why this change should come just when the forces of temptation are surrounding [us] as never before . . . Sometimes more can be less and less can be more. Even with all we expend and all we do, we are not doing as well as we should and have little evidence that activities secure [our members].

President Packer: “We stress industry, thrift, and self-reliance only to find these very virtues, once established, may work against us. For [many members], an assessment [they] cannot reasonably meet calls up conflicting emotions. Those feelings . . . are not good feelings for Latter-day Saints.”

President Packer: “When we press [members] too hard, we infer that they aren’t good enough . . . If you understand the human ego at all, you will know that [members] will withdraw from activity rather than say they can’t afford the cost [in time and money].”

President Packer: “You brethren from the Andes are familiar with the llama. A member of the camel family, it has an interesting characteristic. There is a very set limit as to how much this beast of burden will carry. Ninety pounds is the limit. If more weight is placed on its back, it will simply surrender; give up. It will lie down and will not move until some of the burden is lifted. It does not bite or kick or spit. It simply lies down and will not get up until the load is reduced. Think of that, brethren, when you worry about your inactive.”

President Packer: "Local leaders have been effectively conditioned to hold back until programmed as to what to do, how, to whom, when, and for how long. Can you see that when we overemphasize programs . . . we are in danger of losing the inspiration, the resourcefulness, that which should characterize Latter-day Saints? Then the very principle of individual revelation is in jeopardy, and we drift from a fundamental gospel principle . . . [There needs to be] a better balance between families being assessed time and money to support Church activities, and Church activities complementing what families should do for themselves and backing away . . . so they can do it. That is, if all of us will understand and will do it. I repeat, perhaps for one time only we have an opportunity to adjust that balance so that Church activities sustain parents and families rather than the other way around."

President Hinckley: Let us not worry and get all worked up about . . . excursions that now may not be possible. These might provide wonderful fun . . . but [ward and stake] officers and teachers, and our young men and young women, are people of ingenuity who with faith and prayer can work out programs costing little in time and money that will yield tremendous dividends in recreation and faith-building activities. Perhaps we should be less concerned with fun and more concerned with faith.

President Monson: Really, it depends on whether leaders of the young men and young women have been following our direction to keep their activities closer to home and more modest, or whether they have been among those who each year have found it necessary to accelerate the glamour of activities which cost more money . . . The building of testimonies is not related to financial costs. It is not necessary to buy the activity of our youth. Our youth activities depart from the pattern of the world . . . Many of our youth activities in recent years have supplanted the home and family. There [is] a tendency in our thinking that an activity must be exotic to be successful . . . The word spreads, the cost escalates and yearning increases, while objectives dim and time commitments of leaders and youth become burdensome. Errantly we have used the term "Super Activity."

"If we do, then that vacuum will be filled with prayer and work and study, study for school, for instance, study of the gospel. It will be filled with faith and reverence. It will be filled with the intimate love between husband and wife, with the tender love of parents to children. There will come a safe and virtuous dependency. Latter-day Saints will come to depend upon the Lord instead of upon the headquarters of the Church . . . There is some risk associated with what I am saying. Perhaps some will excuse themselves and do little or nothing. That is not much of a risk considering the many we lose because they cannot pay the price asked of them . . . That space belongs to families. When we cut down on Sundays to the block plan . . . and left some time open, you know what happened. Now brethren, it is their time. Let them use it as they feel to do --- for better or for worse. That is the risk.”

When it comes to stake budgets, you brethren have great latitude. You can do more to help than we [at Church headquarters] can. Be careful what you ask the bishops to supply to you . . . Please consider once again what the First Presidency has repeated so many times. (Boyd K. Packer, "A Plea to Stake Presidents," Leadership Training Meeting, April 1, 1988)

Expenses for the stake should be minimal, with all costs of physical facilities . . . being covered from the general funds of the Church. Let the budget funds which come from headquarters flow down to the wards. (Gordon B. Hinckley, "Rise to a Larger Vision of the Work," New Budget Program Satellite Broadcast, February 18, 1990)

We have also heard of some very clever inventions calculated to circumvent the instructions and maintain . . . the expensive, even extravagant, activities to which we have become accustomed. These resourceful souls will have cause to repent once they understand the spirit of the decision. Those clever practices will fade as you learn the purpose for it all . . . And, just as stake leaders now will sponsor fewer activities, leaving more of the time and money to ward leaders, ward leaders in turn will leave more of both to the families . . . We have been over-programming stable families to meet the needs of those with problems. We must seek a better way." (Boyd K. Packer, "Teach Them Correct Principles," New Budget Satellite Broadcast, February 18, 1990).

So, the problem, Regional Representatives? There will be a tendency, we have seen it already when we began to phase out and withdraw, for local leaders . . . to want to use that time [freed up by reduction in programs and activities] to build up more detailed programs of their own. Stake leaders now must sponsor fewer activities, leaving most of the time and money to ward leaders . . . Now, will you Regional Representatives watch that, and see that the budgets are shifted down to the wards? It will need your attention. (Boyd K. Packer, "Let Them Govern Themselves," Regional Representatives Seminar, March 30, 1990).

[Jeff K.]

There are always opportunities for efficiencies. Our ward for instance has a bishop in which much of the information is handled via emails while decisions are made in PEC and other council meetings.

[Duncan]

I recall a memo sent out about all this when I was in the mission field in this one area and that would have been Feb-July 1999

[rongo]

Yes, this has been repeated in FP letters over the years, but the current letter archives from the leader web site doesn't go back very far.

The 1990 talks went into detail of similar exhortations stretching back to 1939! President Packer quoted President Romney in this regard: "Brethren! How many tellin's does it take!"

Reducing/eliminating extraneous meetings, programs, and activities is one of themost difficult things to accomplish, even when there is emphatic direction from the highest levels of the Church.

[Duncan]

Rongo, Rongo, Rongo, tsk tsk tsk-my dear Lad! you give up too easy!

http://lds.org/pa/display/0,17884,5154-1,00.html

[The Nehor]

I'm proud of my Stake Presidency. They went through the calendar and kicked off every meeting not in the CHI or fulfilling some kind of purpose required by the CHI and two they feel they had to keep due to a combination of revelation and needs within the stake (both one-off meetings).

[mfbukowski]

Rongo:

You definitely want to avoid President Eyring's talk in priesthood from the last conference.

Be sure to read no farther- skip to the next post.

http://lds.org/general-conference/2011/10/preparation-in-the-priesthood-i-need-your-help?lang=eng

We are being prepared for priesthood service that will become more challenging with time. For instance, our muscles and our brains age as we do. Our capacity to learn and remember what we have read will diminish. To give the priesthood service the Lord expects of us will take more and more self-discipline every day of our lives. We can be prepared for that test by building faith through service as we go.

The Lord has given us the opportunity to prepare by something He has called “the oath and covenant [of] the priesthood.”³

It is a covenant we make with God to keep all His commandments and give service as He would give it if He were personally present. Living up to that standard as best we can builds the strength we will need to endure to the end.

Great priesthood trainers have shown me how to build that strength: it is to form a habit of pushing on through the fatigue and fear that might make you think of quitting. The Lord’s great mentors have shown me that spiritual staying power comes from working past the point when others would have taken a rest.

You great priesthood leaders who have built that spiritual strength in your youth still possess it when physical strength weakens.

My younger brother was in a small Utah city on business. He got a phone call at his hotel from President Spencer W. Kimball. It was late at night after what was a hard day of work for my brother and surely for President Kimball, who began the conversation this way. He said, “I heard that you were in town. I know it’s late and that you may be in bed, but could you help me? I need you as my companion to see the condition of all our chapels in this city.” My brother went with him that night, lacking knowledge of chapel maintenance or anything about chapels and not knowing why President Kimball would be doing such a thing after his long day or why he needed any help.

Years later I received a similar call late at night in a hotel in Japan. I was then the new commissioner of education for the Church. I knew that President Gordon B. Hinckley was staying somewhere in that same hotel on his separate assignment to Japan. I answered the ringing phone just after I had lain down on the bed to sleep, exhausted by having done all I thought I had the strength to do.

President Hinckley asked in his pleasant voice, “Why are you sleeping when I am here reading a manuscript that we have been asked to review?” So I got up and went to work, even though I knew that President Hinckley could give a better review of a manuscript than I could possibly do. But somehow he made me feel that he needed my help.

President Thomas S. Monson, at the end of almost every meeting, asks the secretary to the First Presidency, “Am I up to date on my work?” And he always smiles when the answer comes back: “Oh, yes, President, you are.” President Monson’s pleased smile sends me a message. It makes me think, “Is there something more I could do on my assignments?” And then I go back to my office to work.

[why me]

I'm looking for recent quotes, from the CHI or other sources, exhorting priesthood leaders to reduce and simplify activities and to rein in time and money commitments for members. I have the really, really good ones from 1990, when Church policy was drastically changed, but that was 22 years ago. ).

Much of this has to do with educating people in humanity. In this environment of efficiency, productivity and results both in the world of work and in our everyday lives, some members who especially work in the business world can bring such values to their callings. Or members can allow such values that exist in the workplace to invade their chuch callings because they understand success as a continuation of being busy wth meetings.

You need to have a conversation with your ward leaders. And your conversation needs to focus on why your local church is not a business and why it shouldn't be run as one.

[rongo]

Rongo:

You definitely want to avoid President Eyring's talk in priesthood from the last conference.

Be sure to read no farther- skip to the next post.

You misunderstand. I'm not referring to fulfilling and magnifying callings or lack of commitment on my or the members of my ward's part. I'm talking about programs, meetings, and activities that intrude upon families' time and finances outside of the scope of the CHI and Church policy. I'm a bishop, mfbukowski ---- I'm not agitating to stop holding MIA activities during the week or eliminating home teaching. There is also no contradiction between the excerpts from Presidents Hinckley, Monson, and Packer I posted in the OP and the President Eyring excerpt you linked to.

Let me give you one of multitudes of examples. A couple of years ago, it was announced in bishopric training that the stake would be holding a stake level marriage and family relations class. It would be every Friday night for eight weeks, and a very large attendance quota was set (a chapel needed to be filled). Couples needed to attend together, and there would be very intensive treatment of delicate issues, but it would be handled very well and nothing confidential would leave the class. Moreover, it was imperative that participants not miss any classes and have perfect attendance. We were asked how we felt about this. The collective bishops had serious objections to this on a number of fronts. We were informed that a couple had already been called and set apart, and that we needed to make it happen. We suggested that they could visit our wards in rotation as itinerant teachers and teach this class during the Sunday School hour, or that they could systematically teach the course over two years in our wards during the Sunday School hour, ward by ward. This was likewise rejected. The class was very poorly attended, and upon pressure from the stake presidency, was filled by mostly bishopric members, high councilors, etc. and their wives ----- because the show had to go on.

Multiply this new stake class/meeting/program approach to address a perceived problem (i.e., strengthening home and family) by about a hundred, and you can see what I am addressing. President Eyring was also not recommending this sort of approach in what you posted above, by the way.

[rongo]

Rongo, Rongo, Rongo, tsk tsk tsk-my dear Lad! you give up too easy!

http://lds.org/pa/di...,5154-1,00.html

It's more a function of me not having e-search skills. Thanks, though! That is from 1999 ---- I'm sure there are other references in Church magazines since then as well.

I will look through books 1 and 2 of CHI, but would appreciate help on letters or Church magazine references as well.

Thanks again!

[why me]

You misunderstand. I'm not referring to fulfilling and magnifying callings or lack of commitment on my or the members of my ward's part. I'm talking about programs, meetings, and activities that intrude upon families' time and finances outside of the scope of the CHI and Church policy. I'm a bishop, mfbukowski ---- I'm not agitating to stop holding MIA activities during the week or eliminating home teaching. There is also no contradiction between the excerpts from Presidents Hinckley, Monson, and Packer I posted in the OP and the President Eyring excerpt you linked to.

Let me give you one of multitudes of examples. A couple of years ago, it was announced in bishopric training that the stake would be holding a stake level marriage and family relations class. It would be every Friday night for eight weeks, and a very large attendance quota was set (a chapel needed to be filled). Couples needed to attend together, and there would be very intensive treatment of delicate issues, but it would be handled very well and nothing confidential would leave the class. Moreover, it was imperative that participants not miss any classes and have perfect attendance. We were asked how we felt about this. The collective bishops had serious objections to this on a number of fronts. We were informed that a couple had already been called and set apart, and that we needed to make it happen. We suggested that they could visit our wards in rotation as itinerant teachers and teach this class during the Sunday School hour, or that they could systematically teach the course over two years in our wards during the Sunday School hour, ward by ward. This was likewise rejected. The class was very poorly attended, and upon pressure from the stake presidency, was filled by mostly bishopric members, high councilors, etc. and their wives ----- because the show had to go on.

Multiply this new stake class/meeting/program approach to address a perceived problem (i.e., strengthening home and family) by about a hundred, and you can see what I am addressing. President Eyring was also not recommending this sort of approach in what you posted above, by the way.

As I said, people can tend to put their business life or work life into church life when it comes to meetings and other gatherings that take up time. To combat it in your ward or stake you will need to have a conversation with the powers that be. They must see that having such meetings can be counter productive and not efficient. But if these people are business people and used to such meetings, you will have a problem in convincing them. Speak of what it means to be human. We are not robots.

[Duncan]

It's more a function of me not having e-search skills. Thanks, though! That is from 1999 ---- I'm sure there are other references in Church magazines since then as well.

I will look through books 1 and 2 of CHI, but would appreciate help on letters or Church magazine references as well.

Thanks again!

no sweat! I'll see what I can come up with!

[Duncan]

It's more a function of me not having e-search skills. Thanks, though! That is from 1999 ---- I'm sure there are other references in Church magazines since then as well.

I will look through books 1 and 2 of CHI, but would appreciate help on letters or Church magazine references as well.

Thanks again!

I was thinking of this collection of quotations and am thankful I found it again!

http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/goalSettingAndService.htm

I especially like the Elder Gene R. Cook part

[frankenstein]

Duncan found what I knew of

Edited January 24, 2012 by frankenstein

[Duncan]

Duncan found what I knew of

it's the glasses that make me wonderful like that

[rongo]

That's a great BYU-Idaho link, Duncan. Thank you!

[rongo]

You need to have a conversation with your ward leaders. And your conversation needs to focus on why your local church is not a business and why it shouldn't be run as one.

My ward is in good shape. In fact, many members are grateful that family time and money is as protected in our ward as it is. The problem is that the stake programs, activities, and meetings are so numerous. I actually shared this in participating in this dialogue last week: Our ward provided almost 3/4 of the total stake turnout for the stake Day of Service project. I think this is because our ward is less burned-out than the other wards because we have been teaching and following these principles for years. But ---- we have taken flak and receive pressure for it.

The Gene R. Cook quote in Duncan's link was outstanding.

[Duncan]

That's a great BYU-Idaho link, Duncan. Thank you!

you're very welcome!

[mfbukowski]

You misunderstand. I'm not referring to fulfilling and magnifying callings or lack of commitment on my or the members of my ward's part. I'm talking about programs, meetings, and activities that intrude upon families' time and finances outside of the scope of the CHI and Church policy. I'm a bishop, mfbukowski ---- I'm not agitating to stop holding MIA activities during the week or eliminating home teaching. There is also no contradiction between the excerpts from Presidents Hinckley, Monson, and Packer I posted in the OP and the President Eyring excerpt you linked to.

Let me give you one of multitudes of examples. A couple of years ago, it was announced in bishopric training that the stake would be holding a stake level marriage and family relations class. It would be every Friday night for eight weeks, and a very large attendance quota was set (a chapel needed to be filled). Couples needed to attend together, and there would be very intensive treatment of delicate issues, but it would be handled very well and nothing confidential would leave the class. Moreover, it was imperative that participants not miss any classes and have perfect attendance. We were asked how we felt about this. The collective bishops had serious objections to this on a number of fronts. We were informed that a couple had already been called and set apart, and that we needed to make it happen. We suggested that they could visit our wards in rotation as itinerant teachers and teach this class during the Sunday School hour, or that they could systematically teach the course over two years in our wards during the Sunday School hour, ward by ward. This was likewise rejected. The class was very poorly attended, and upon pressure from the stake presidency, was filled by mostly bishopric members, high councilors, etc. and their wives ----- because the show had to go on.

Multiply this new stake class/meeting/program approach to address a perceived problem (i.e., strengthening home and family) by about a hundred, and you can see what I am addressing. President Eyring was also not recommending this sort of approach in what you posted above, by the way.

Oh ok- That's very different from what my understanding was.

Let's just say that I have been in positions like yours and now I totally comprehend what you are talking about.

My suggestion, quite honestly, is to not worry about it. Do your calling to the best of your ability meaning be sure to balance your time effectively between work home and calling. It often seems like the purpose of the stake is to just put more demands on the wards and not to support the wards, as one might think their purpose should be.

In my experience, a few failed programs should convince the stake they are following the wrong path. I can understand where they are coming from too- the pressures of the world are very great right now and they are trying to help, but like all of us, need to learn to balance the demands placed on others with their own desire to do what the Lord wants- but perhaps not using the Lord's methods.

Hey man, bottom line is, the worst they can do is "fire" you for doing your best- and that is not likely

[Duncan]

Here is a talk given in the April 2000 General Conference by Pres. Packer that mentions some of what we are talking about here

"I fear this supernal gift [talking about the Holy Ghost] is being obscured by programs and activities and schedules and so many meetings. There are so many places to go, so many things to do in this noisy world. We can be too busy to pay attention to the promptings of the Spirit."

http://lds.org/ensign/2000/05/the-cloven-tongues-of-fire?lang=eng

[rongo]

My suggestion, quite honestly, is to not worry about it. Do your calling to the best of your ability meaning be sure to balance your time effectively between work home and calling.

I'm actually just fine as far as time demands, personally; it's other members I'm really concerned about. As I've explained to members of the stake presidency on behalf of other members, "perception is reality." If people feel over-burdened, insisting to them that they aren't doesn't help at all. That said, there are certainly members who try to "slack" by claiming over-burdening, but I'm never going to make it an issue if people feel burned out. Releases and changes, sure, but not guilt-tripping. I've had my share of being disappointed in people and their lack of commitment, too.

In my experience, a few failed programs should convince the stake they are following the wrong path.

You would think so, but until this recent "uprising," Bishop rongo has been easy to dismiss as the only "voice in the wilderness." Aside from bringing it up when I've felt it necessary, we have really just quietly been choosing not to go to non-essential activities and meetings if we don't want to. One other bishop sat down with the stake president and went through stake items, one-by-one, to get a determination of what was "required or mandatory." Elder Cook's experience (linked to above) of counting 39 activities and meetings in three months is similar to mine.

I can understand where they are coming from too- the pressures of the world are very great right now and they are trying to help, but like all of us, need to learn to balance the demands placed on others with their own desire to do what the Lord wants- but perhaps not using the Lord's methods.

Absolutely. Auxiliary presidencies have good people in them, and they want to justify their calling --- leave their mark and "magnify their calling." Often, this includes lots of initiatives, activities, and programs as the "human nature" default setting. Interestingly, a member of the stake young women's presidency commented during this discussion that they should probably focus much more on spending time with the different wards and presidencies and help that way, instead of planning and executing many large stake activities and meetings throughout the year. One can hope . . .

[KevinG]

====good intentions====good intentions====good intentions====> HELL

I always took this counsel as avoiding extravagent expenses and uneccessary meetings. Our Scout Committee finds home grown fun whenever possible, relatively easy since we're no more than an hour away from national parks and wilderness areas. We also do our correspondance and organizing through e-mail and on-line advancement programs. It lets us concentrate on leading boys and having fun without undue stress on our families.

[rpn]

The strengthening the marriage and strengthening family curriculae were introduced almost four years ago in response to a very real need, often unknown to leaders because it is carefully concealed in the homes of good members who simply have trouble in this area. It's introduction was supposed to start with the leaders, so that those invited would not feel like people thought something was wrong with them, and in recognition that everyone who doesn't need it personally may know or have stewardship over others where knowing the principles would help them help others. And it wasn't supposed to be held during sunday school precisely because of the confidentiality issues (and to help couples establish the date night habit). But I think each was only to be 8 weeks long for each component --- and a one time thing (so couples got it out of the way and then didn't have to repeat it). And provisions were to be made for babysitting so both spouses could attend. So I submit that your example is unfortunate.

But I do think that the meeting technology that allows people to attend from home or remotely, skipping all the travel, ought to be used liberally.

Having said that, the presentation in the Nov 2010 worldwide leadership meeting is where I recall the most recent counsel about one job, few meetings being given.

[mfbukowski]

.... relatively easy since we're no more than an hour away from national parks and wilderness areas......

grrrrrrr.

<Jealousy rears its ugly head>

I'm surrounded by 17 million people within an hour's drive in any direction! (except west- but camping on a boat works only without bonfires....)

[blackstrap]

There's always the Viking Funeral Boat activity mfb.