Value In Reallocating Missionaries Away From Heavy Mormon Areas?

[rongo]

My father-in-law is a ward mission leader in an affluent, heavily-Mormon part of the greater Salt Lake area. Their missionaries only taught two lessons in July, and none in June, and are quite despondent (one companionship covers a whole stake). I am a fierce advocate for door-to-door tracting even today, but even I acknowledge the absolute uselessness of this in this particular area (literally almost everyone in the neighborhood is LDS, and the neighborhood is the stake they are assigned to). It seems to me that it would be better for these elders to be reassigned to an area where there are less members, and I then thought that it might be a good idea to do this in many other areas, and instead have ward missionaries teach any investigators that arise and do other missionary duties in those areas.

 

Granted that none of us have any pull, authority, or say in this . . . Simply as a thought exercise and discussion, what are people's thoughts on this?

 

Thanks! 

[ERayR]

My father-in-law is a ward mission leader in an affluent, heavily-Mormon part of the greater Salt Lake area. Their missionaries only taught two lessons in July, and none in June, and are quite despondent (one companionship covers a whole stake). I am a fierce advocate for door-to-door tracting even today, but even I acknowledge the absolute uselessness of this in this particular area (literally almost everyone in the neighborhood is LDS, and the neighborhood is the stake they are assigned to). It seems to me that it would be better for these elders to be reassigned to an area where there are less members, and I then thought that it might be a good idea to do this in many other areas, and instead have ward missionaries teach any investigators that arise and do other missionary duties in those areas.

 

Granted that none of us have any pull, authority, or say in this . . . Simply as a thought exercise and discussion, what are people's thoughts on this?

 

Thanks! 

 

That is the mission presidents call.  I agree with you but for that missionary companionship it is certainly a lesson in patience and perseverance.

[bluebell]

I live in Layton and our missionary elders are very busy.  It's been two months since we've had them for dinner but the last time they were here i asked them how many investigators they had and it was over 5.  They've had two baptisms in the last 3 months as well.

 

So, maybe some areas do need to be left alone for a while, but i don't know that that should be decided on based on the number of members in the area.

[Thinking]

My father-in-law is a ward mission leader in an affluent, heavily-Mormon part of the greater Salt Lake area. Their missionaries only taught two lessons in July, and none in June, and are quite despondent (one companionship covers a whole stake). I am a fierce advocate for door-to-door tracting even today, but even I acknowledge the absolute uselessness of this in this particular area (literally almost everyone in the neighborhood is LDS, and the neighborhood is the stake they are assigned to). It seems to me that it would be better for these elders to be reassigned to an area where there are less members, and I then thought that it might be a good idea to do this in many other areas, and instead have ward missionaries teach any investigators that arise and do other missionary duties in those areas.

 

Granted that none of us have any pull, authority, or say in this . . . Simply as a thought exercise and discussion, what are people's thoughts on this?

 

Thanks! 

 

Those 80,000 missionaries have to be put somewhere. Can you say market saturation or the law of diminishing returns?

[Duncan]

In our very un Mormon area each ward in the city has 3 companionships, which is too many! We only need a set of sisters and a set of elders but the MP can't control how many people come here and he has to stick them somewhere. There are smaller areas with very small branches and they have 4 elders, we are tripping over missionaries!!!!! and in an area with less then 200 people , 15 members after the first week of visiting the members, what else are you supposed to do? it leads to all kinds of problems

[rongo]

Our mission president gets monthly calls asking if he can take 20+ new 18 year-olds and put them somewhere. Our stake also now has a minimum of one companionship per unit (including some very tiny branches), and some wards have 3+ companionships. Definitely not enough work to go around in many instances.

 

I don't think we would lose anything if we had much of North America (particularly the intermountain west/southwest) be 100% ward missionary serviced, and send those thousands of missionaries into very light LDS areas of the world (starting with the Midwest/East Coast and foreign). And we would probably have much to gain in those areas . . .

[Garden Girl]

In my small area here on the central Oregon coast, we have one set of elders or sisters at a time... plus a set just south of us, and one just north of us.   If our could help reactivate all of the inactives in my particular ward, we would double our ward activity in no time.

I think putting more into the areas of low LDS population would be logical...

 

GG  

 

  

[strappinglad]

I hear India has room of a couple of companionships, not much more though.

[Calm]

I live in Layton and our missionary elders are very busy.  It's been two months since we've had them for dinner but the last time they were here i asked them how many investigators they had and it was over 5.  They've had two baptisms in the last 3 months as well.

 

So, maybe some areas do need to be left alone for a while, but i don't know that that should be decided on based on the number of members in the area.

My son went to the Ogden mission, which was one of the highest baptizing missions in the world at the time, iirc.  Different areas had different rates of nonLDS, of course, but a large part of their work was reactivation.

[Calm]

Our mission president gets monthly calls asking if he can take 20+ new 18 year-olds and put them somewhere. Our stake also now has a minimum of one companionship per unit (including some very tiny branches), and some wards have 3+ companionships. Definitely not enough work to go around in many instances.

 

I don't think we would lose anything if we had much of North America (particularly the intermountain west/southwest) be 100% ward missionary serviced, and send those thousands of missionaries into very light LDS areas of the world (starting with the Midwest/East Coast and foreign). And we would probably have much to gain in those areas . . .

High density LDS areas probably have the ability to house missionaries pretty easily though.  It may take more time to set up infrastructure in low density areas.  So it may take time to adjust the higher numbers of missionaries to where they are most effective but they will likely eventually shift to these areas…my speculation.

[Rain]

Our missionaries were covering just our ward - a half square mile with 2 major streets and a school taking up quite a bit of space. They really weren't busy enough so they moved and we got sisters in the ward next to us now covering both wards. Then they still weren't busy enough so they are taking shifts at the visitor's center as well.

While I really want my son to soften his heart and go on a mission, there are days I think there might be a good thing about him going a little later when there are not so many missionaries out.

After talking about this here last week I had an idea and talked with the mission president. The church is aware of the things going on and I have an idea that many things are being worked to deal with all of this. It's just frustrating at the moment to wait and see what they are and how it will work out.

[Storm Rider]

On the surface there is no golden area that is obvious to the untrained eye.  In areas where some say there are not potential converts another missionary will work and find great numbers of them.  I served in a mission that had a reputation for being very difficult.  However, we had tremendous success seeing almost 30 people choose to enter the waters of baptism.  I do think there are some principles that need to be observed to learn to teach with the Spirit, but that is another topic.  

 

What is real is that the Lord has said the field is white and ready to harvest.  I am not aware of any area that is excluded by God's decree.  The objective as a missionary is to put yourself in a position where you can bear witness to the truthfulness of the restoration and then the rest is up to God.  He tends to hold up his side of the proposition.  

[rongo]

None of what you said, Storm Rider, would be negated by having ward missionaries do the missionary work in certain areas instead of allocating full-time missionaries.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

On the surface there is no golden area that is obvious to the untrained eye.  In areas where some say there are not potential converts another missionary will work and find great numbers of them.  I served in a mission that had a reputation for being very difficult.  However, we had tremendous success seeing almost 30 people choose to enter the waters of baptism.  I do think there are some principles that need to be observed to learn to teach with the Spirit, but that is another topic.  

 

What is real is that the Lord has said the field is white and ready to harvest.  I am not aware of any area that is excluded by God's decree.  The objective as a missionary is to put yourself in a position where you can bear witness to the truthfulness of the restoration and then the rest is up to God.  He tends to hold up his side of the proposition.  

 

One of my areas was like that, previous stellar missionaries had begged the MP to move them out. Well, my companion and I had baptized a family of 6 and had about 10 more with commitments, when we were both abruptly pulled and the ZL's were put in the area.

[rongo]

Missionary work is cyclical, with booms and busts --- even for "good" missionaries. Once, I was asked in a meeting why my ward was leading the stake in baptisms. The stake leaders weren't happy with my response: "Honestly, it goes in cycles. We are doing the same things with the same intensity that we did last year (when we only had two baptisms for the year), but things just happened this year when they didn't last year. Our ward focus has always been and remains having frequent gospel conversations --- not on numbers of baptisms." They were hoping to hear of a "program" or gimmick that other wards could be encouraged to do.

[rongo]

Another factor in all of this is the fact that missionary work has become/is becoming a de facto extension of the youth program (in an effort to staunch the hemorrhaging of youth after high school), rather than missionary "work" (cf. Elder Anderson: "It's not missionary work, it's missionary fun!"). The de-emphasis/outright hostility towards tracting (banned in some missions), indexing, social media missionary "work" ("Tweet My Gospel"), chapel tours, extensive service, etc. --- all are designed to protect missionaries from "negative" experiences and help them not get discouraged and want to go home (because their time is filled with things that won't have them constantly trying to talk to people who aren't interested). Our visiting authority for the last stake conference told us in the adult meeting that it is our obligation to ensure that the missionaries have only positive experiences, and no negative experiences. My thought on that is that it may be the attempt to shield missionaries from rejection and hard work that may be causing many of the emotional/depression/anxiety/going home early problems that have increased.

 

Our mission president announced that the Church will begin a program in the last six months of missions of preparing missionaries to re-enter "civilian life." Training on dating, job applications, job interviewing, study skills, and other social skills will begin taking up a lot of time in the last quarter of the mission.

 

All of which leads me to think that the primary purpose of missionary work is becoming/may become something other than missionary work (i.e., that missionary work is becoming a secondary consideration to trying to help youth become and stay active and competent). Under this objective, leaving missionaries without much missionary work in many areas is acceptable because there are other time fillers, and it isn't the primary reason for being there, anyway.

[Coreyb]

Another factor in all of this is the fact that missionary work has become/is becoming a de facto extension of the youth program (in an effort to staunch the hemorrhaging of youth after high school), rather than missionary "work" (cf. Elder Anderson: "It's not missionary work, it's missionary fun!"). The de-emphasis/outright hostility towards tracting (banned in some missions), indexing, social media missionary "work" ("Tweet My Gospel"), chapel tours, extensive service, etc. --- all are designed to protect missionaries from "negative" experiences and help them not get discouraged and want to go home (because their time is filled with things that won't have them constantly trying to talk to people who aren't interested). Our visiting authority for the last stake conference told us in the adult meeting that it is our obligation to ensure that the missionaries have only positive experiences, and no negative experiences. My thought on that is that it may be the attempt to shield missionaries from rejection and hard work that may be causing many of the emotional/depression/anxiety/going home early problems that have increased.

 

Our mission president announced that the Church will begin a program in the last six months of missions of preparing missionaries to re-enter "civilian life." Training on dating, job applications, job interviewing, study skills, and other social skills will begin taking up a lot of time in the last quarter of the mission.

 

All of which leads me to think that the primary purpose of missionary work is becoming/may become something other than missionary work (i.e., that missionary work is becoming a secondary consideration to trying to help youth become and stay active and competent). Under this objective, leaving missionaries without much missionary work in many areas is acceptable because there are other time fillers, and it isn't the primary reason for being there, anyway.

That is sad. My mission was full of hard work, disappointment, rejection and stress with occasional bursts of joy. I dont believe in shielding anyone, especially missionaries, from trials. Doesnt that go against a major tenet of our theology, to taste the bitter to know the good? Keeping youth active in the church is important, but do we really want to create a generation of lazy adults to do it?

[Stargazer]

Those 80,000 missionaries have to be put somewhere. Can you say market saturation or the law of diminishing returns?

We are a LONG way away from market saturation. Just because some missionaries are assigned to areas where they probably aren't particularly useful does not mean that every missionary is so deployed.

The full time missionaries in our stake are pretty busy. We have enough that every ward has its own dedicated FTMs, and the percent of LDS in the area is around 2%. So there's planty of room to tract, and many opportunities to do service projects.

[Storm Rider]

Missionary work is cyclical, with booms and busts --- even for "good" missionaries. Once, I was asked in a meeting why my ward was leading the stake in baptisms. The stake leaders weren't happy with my response: "Honestly, it goes in cycles. We are doing the same things with the same intensity that we did last year (when we only had two baptisms for the year), but things just happened this year when they didn't last year. Our ward focus has always been and remains having frequent gospel conversations --- not on numbers of baptisms." They were hoping to hear of a "program" or gimmick that other wards could be encouraged to do.

 

I think we disagree on this issue or it could be a problem of semantics.  The same principles work in one place as they would in another. What is cyclical is "us"; our degree of spirituality often ebbs and flows; this is what you may be saying and we would then heartily agree with each other.  

 

I completely disagree with the idea that if we work X hours of tracting and X numbers of lessons a missionary will produce X number of baptisms.  I don't think there is a direct correlation between this type of work and the actual principles of teaching with the Spirit.  

 

I am not as confident in ward missionaries as you. However, it may work in some geographic areas where wards and stakes are literally a few city blocks in size with a plethora of return missionaries that remain dedicated to missionary service.  

[readstoomuch]

Our missionaries are not that busy and struggle. They need to have more service and integration into the ward. For example all eight year olds and youth who are struggling would benefit from the missionary lessons. My teen was struggling and the lessons helped her remarkably. Unfortunately, anything but baptisms seems to be a distant second in importance. Even if you reactivate someone or help someone who is struggling it does not get the response it should. I am a ward missionary and have seen elders who were sitting in their apartment or library doing nothing. There is not much for them to do during the day and they are not allowed to tract in this mission. So much good could be done and instead they drift and I am not sure that we don`t cause them to wonder why they went on a mission.

I hate to say it, but it makes me think that this was not thought out very well. I believe the changing of the age requirement was inspired, but where was the plan to integrate them. We seem to be reacting after the fact and giving the problem lip service, but nothing seems to happen. I have talked to the bishop, stake president, mission president and area authority. They all admit that it is a problem, but nothing changes. Our last two stake conferences have been full of missionary emphasis and about a third of our sacrament meetings and firesides. I don`t understand and am discouraged. Members don`t want to talk about missionary work. We have tried to focus on activities and getting to know people outside of the Church. They will talk to us about that. If we focused on service this would all go so well and have so much potential. I just shake my head.

[JLHPROF]

I agree with Readstoomuch. Perhaps too much focus on missions is placed on converting new members. Service projects, teaching questioning youth, and other similar things can be just as beneficial and raising activity percentages would do just as much for attendance as all the tracting and baptizing.

People today don't need to be asked "do you want to know about the Church", they have the internet if they are curious or investigating and can contact the missionaries themselves.

[Calm]

Depending on the area, of course.

My nephew is off in two weeks to the MTC, don't know how long he will be there but eventually he will be in the Marshall Islands, where he will be lucky if he can use email instead of snail mail....and has been told he needs to fish for his own dinner.

[Senator]

Don't forget that every missionary is where they are because they have been called to serve there by revelation.

[Kenngo1969]

Don't forget that every missionary is where they are because they have been called to serve there by revelation.

He said, snarkily?  

[Senator]

He said, snarkily?

 

Is it not true?