Anybody else feel this way about Elder's Quorum and Home Teaching?

[stemelbow]

18 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Undt in dees context, vot vould that SS stand for?   

Sunday School.

[JarMan]

Thank you for the replies. I really sensed some genuine concern from many of you. To be clear, I don't harbor resentment toward church institutions in general. I've been the GD teacher for the last year and a half and I absolutely love it. I spend an ungodly amount of time during the week studying and preparing and I've learned so much. I love the class discussions and I love the Book of Mormon. I even found out last year that I love the NT. (Who knew?) I've had many callings and there's not a single one I've disliked. I even enjoyed teaching primary. My discontent is rather narrowly focused on EQ and HT. (And for the record I didn't say I hated the EQP, I actually praised him.)

I recognize there is a practical reason to have an EQ. The EQ Presidency is a good training ground for future bishopric members and high councilmen. There are a lot of administrative things to be learned in managing the home teaching program and in the other duties. But it reminds me so much of a story I read in a biography of Peter the Great. When Peter was young, his father assigned a bunch of old soldiers and other miscellaneous attendants to be part of his "army." He would command these men around and play "war" with them. It was humiliating for these men to be used in this way, of course, because from their perspective they were "toy soldiers" being bossed around by a spoiled child. I can't help but think that the entire HT program is set up as a "toy army" to help train future leaders. I think it is successful in doing this. But I resent being a toy soldier fighting pretend wars with wooden swords. We're all supposed to be good soldiers and pretend like we are in a real army, but I'm tired of games of let's pretend. And I don't like having assigned friends or being asked to be one.

[mfbukowski]

6 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Sunday School.

I must be getting old.

In the context of the prejudice shown by the teacher and the problem with a German name, somehow another SS popped into my mind  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutzstaffel

[Storm Rider]

11 hours ago, JarMan said:

So we've got a new EQP. He's a young guy with a young family, just graduated from BYU and teaches seminary for a living. He's a genuinely good guy and he decided to hand out a short survey on Sunday asking about what we liked and disliked in EQ.  I wrote down that I hate everything about EQ. I hate the manual. I hate home teaching. I hate being home taught. Elder's Quorum is the worst hour of my week unless my HT's were over that week, then it's the second worst hour. 

Anyway, I feel a twinge of regret about survey-ambushing him like that, but I answered honestly like he asked us to. So now that I've lain down on the virtual couch, can anyone tell me: am I normal or is it common to feel this dissatisfied with everything EQ related? 

Jar, this seems more to stay about you than it does with reality.

EQ and HP meetings have always been my favorites.  I have always enjoyed being about to talk about gospel topics with others that either were going through the same trials I was or had been through them. 

I would probably agree with you that the manuals are not the very best in the world IF you follow them strictly.  However, with a good teacher that uses them as a guideline and then adapts them to the needs of the Quorum or Group then they serve their purpose well.

I have never viewed home teaching as trying to find out about those families I was called to serve.  I always saw it as an opportunity to meet other members and become friends by serving them.  I appreciated and desired that they understood I was the first person they should call in emergencies.  I wanted to be a rock for them when things were tough regardless of what the problem was.  Unless there was something very serious going on I never relayed that information to others.  The only time I have heard information about families is when there was a problem that was bigger than I was and was also something the EQ/HP leaders or the bishop could help with.  

As we get older friends don't just fall out of the sky.  We have to work harder at sharing our time with others and inviting them to be friends by serving them.  We all have to put something into it for the program to work.  

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Jar, this seems more to stay about you than it does with reality.

EQ and HP meetings have always been my favorites.  I have always enjoyed being about to talk about gospel topics with others that either were going through the same trials I was or had been through them. 

I would probably agree with you that the manuals are not the very best in the world IF you follow them strictly.  However, with a good teacher that uses them as a guideline and then adapts them to the needs of the Quorum or Group then they serve their purpose well.

I have never viewed home teaching as trying to find out about those families I was called to serve.  I always saw it as an opportunity to meet other members and become friends by serving them.  I appreciated and desired that they understood I was the first person they should call in emergencies.  I wanted to be a rock for them when things were tough regardless of what the problem was.  Unless there was something very serious going on I never relayed that information to others.  The only time I have heard information about families is when there was a problem that was bigger than I was and was also something the EQ/HP leaders or the bishop could help with.  

As we get older friends don't just fall out of the sky.  We have to work harder at sharing our time with others and inviting them to be friends by serving them.  We all have to put something into it for the program to work.  

I think it depends on the elders quorum. Some wards just don't do a good job with priesthood lessons. That said, I very much agree with your thoughts on home teaching. Should I be worried that I agree with you?

[mfbukowski]

26 minutes ago, JarMan said:

Thank you for the replies. I really sensed some genuine concern from many of you. To be clear, I don't harbor resentment toward church institutions in general. I've been the GD teacher for the last year and a half and I absolutely love it. I spend an ungodly amount of time during the week studying and preparing and I've learned so much. I love the class discussions and I love the Book of Mormon. I even found out last year that I love the NT. (Who knew?) I've had many callings and there's not a single one I've disliked. I even enjoyed teaching primary. My discontent is rather narrowly focused on EQ and HT. (And for the record I didn't say I hated the EQP, I actually praised him.)

I recognize there is a practical reason to have an EQ. The EQ Presidency is a good training ground for future bishopric members and high councilmen. There are a lot of administrative things to be learned in managing the home teaching program and in the other duties. But it reminds me so much of a story I read in a biography of Peter the Great. When Peter was young, his father assigned a bunch of old soldiers and other miscellaneous attendants to be part of his "army." He would command these men around and play "war" with them. It was humiliating for these men to be used in this way, of course, because from their perspective they were "toy soldiers" being bossed around by a spoiled child. I can't help but think that the entire HT program is set up as a "toy army" to help train future leaders. I think it is successful in doing this. But I resent being a toy soldier fighting pretend wars with wooden swords. We're all supposed to be good soldiers and pretend like we are in a real army, but I'm tired of games of let's pretend. And I don't like having assigned friends or being asked to be one.

There are only two leaders in a ward who actually hold priesthood keys: one is the bishop and the other is the Elder's Quorum president.  The HPGL is only leader of a "group" offshoot of the stake HP Quorum and has no keys.

The bishop can delegate many responsibilities to the EQP but few do.  I have been in wards where the EQP handles the bulk of welfare problems and counseling members with problems with their finances.  He can instantly mobilize the Home Teachers to help the family with many issues once they are known, of course with the Bishop's knowledge which means a phone call.  This takes a lot off the bishop's plate.

Elder Perry gave our Area a priesthood training - maybe 10 years ago- where he spoke of the power of an Elder's quorum which actually functioned as it should.  It could be the backbone of the ward

But that requires a bishop who understands the potential and EQ members who do not see themselves as "toy soldiers" but the front line, where-the-rubber-meets-the-road true ministers of Christ dealing with problems directly as reported by the home teachers.  The president has the keys on his own.  If he doesn't see that, he needs training.

I have seen this work in a ward, and it is amazing.  The EQ president can be essentially a "vice bishop" and handle much of what a bishop routinely handles and free up the bishop to do only those duties which ONLY a bishop must handle.  

But they both need training that this is the right way to run a ward.  At that point, the EQ members become true ministers of the gospel, worried about their own little "flock" of members for whom they have priesthood responsibility.

All it takes is a little training and a change of attitude.

Edited May 19, 2016 by mfbukowski

[Ahab]

11 hours ago, JarMan said:

I wrote down that I hate everything about EQ. I hate the manual. I hate home teaching. I hate being home taught. Elder's Quorum is the worst hour of my week unless my HT's were over that week, then it's the second worst hour of the werk.

... can anyone tell me: am I normal or is it common to feel this dissatisfied with everything EQ related? 

I may be wrong but I think many people feel kinda that way, if I am right that you are using a little hyperbole there.

To hate something is to want to get rid of it, and I can understand how someone would want to get rid of something they don't like, or at least to want to not use that thing very much.

Like the manual, for example, which is the same manual used in my HP quorum.  I skim over it just to get a sense of what that Church President thought or did and then I pretty much ditch the manual, just focusing on teaching the principles the lesson is meant to cover.  I teach the 2nd and 3rd lessons of the month so I'm talking about the manual that covers some teachings of the Church Presidents.

Or like hating being home taught, as another example.  I usually wanr to help those guys get out of there as soon as possible, but while letting them visit me so they can say that they did. And I usually try to teach those guys instead of just letting them teach me. Basically I try to make lemonade from the lemons,  but still what I really want is to just get rid of them as soon as I can.

And that hour in my HP quorum, or in your case your EQ quorum,  is something I think we should ALL want to get rid of or get over with as soon as we possibly can.  Because when we can get rid of that or get that over with then we all get to come home, which for me is where I would always prefer to be.

[JAHS]

4 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

There are only two leaders in a ward who actually hold priesthood keys: one is the bishop and the other is the Elder's Quorum president.  The HPGL is only leader of a "group" offshoot of the stake HP Quorum and has no keys.

The bishop can delegate many responsibilities to the EQP but few do.  I have been in wards where the EQP handles the bulk of welfare problems and counseling members with problems with their finances.  He can instantly mobilize the Home Teachers to help the family with many issues once they are known, of course with the Bishop's knowledge which means a phone call.  This takes a lot off the bishop's plate.

Elder Perry gave our Area a priesthood training - maybe 10 years ago- where he spoke of the power of an Elder's quorum which actually functioned as it should.  It could be the backbone of the ward

But that requires a bishop who understands the potential and EQ members who do not see themselves as "toy soldiers" but the front line, where-the-rubber-meets-the-road true ministers of Christ dealing with problems directly as reported by the home teachers.  The president has the keys on his own.  If he doesn't see that, he needs training.

I have seen this work in a ward, and it is amazing.  The EQ president can be essentially a "vice bishop" and handle much of what a bishop routinely handles and free up the bishop to do only those duties which ONLY a bishop must handle.  

But they both need training that this is the right way to run a ward.  At that point, the EQ members become true ministers of the gospel, worried about their own little "flock" of members for whom they have priesthood responsibility.

All it takes is a little training and a change of attitude.

Interesting. I have heard the same things about the role of the High Priest group. The Elders do take care of their assigned families, but the High Priests are seen as the leaders and "backbone" of the ward (except when a new family moves in, then we need the young backbones of the elders). All widows and other single women and prospective elders are assigned to the High Priest group to home teach. 
Different strokes for different wards.

[bluebell]

35 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Interesting. I have heard the same things about the role of the High Priest group. The Elders do take care of their assigned families, but the High Priests are seen as the leaders and "backbone" of the ward (except when a new family moves in, then we need the young backbones of the elders). All widows and other single women and prospective elders are assigned to the High Priest group to home teach. 
Different strokes for different wards.

My husband was just set a part as a member of the EQP and the stake president met with the presidency privately for 2 hours to train them.  The bulk of that training was being told that they are responsible for the prospective elders in the ward and to get HT to function so that it's a help and not a hinderance.  Are these assignments something that is at the discretion of the SP or are they delineated in the handbook?

[mfbukowski]

42 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Interesting. I have heard the same things about the role of the High Priest group. The Elders do take care of their assigned families, but the High Priests are seen as the leaders and "backbone" of the ward (except when a new family moves in, then we need the young backbones of the elders). All widows and other single women and prospective elders are assigned to the High Priest group to home teach. 
Different strokes for different wards.

Not really.  The reality is that the HPGL does not have keys and the EQ president does.  Your comments prove that you are not being served by your EQP in the manner you should be- on the other hand of course you have your own issues to deal with.

I just have trouble understanding complaints about church when people still attend and yet complain.  To me it makes no sense.  Talk to someone or don't go- that is what I would do.

Perhaps you need a leadership calling to know how hard it is. If you don't like the teaching and yet are a GD teacher, volunteer to do an EQ lesson.  Participate in the EQ lesson and spice it up a little.  Make comments.  Add points not covered, which you think should be covered.  We get the lessons we deserve, I am convinced.  If the group sits there passively through a boring lesson, it is as much their fault as the teachers

But the church is making major changes in training teachers.  If you have not heard yet, you will.

 

Edited May 19, 2016 by mfbukowski

[hope_for_things]

45 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

There are only two leaders in a ward who actually hold priesthood keys: one is the bishop and the other is the Elder's Quorum president.  The HPGL is only leader of a "group" offshoot of the stake HP Quorum and has no keys.

The bishop can delegate many responsibilities to the EQP but few do.  I have been in wards where the EQP handles the bulk of welfare problems and counseling members with problems with their finances.  He can instantly mobilize the Home Teachers to help the family with many issues once they are known, of course with the Bishop's knowledge which means a phone call.  This takes a lot off the bishop's plate.

Elder Perry gave our Area a priesthood training - maybe 10 years ago- where he spoke of the power of an Elder's quorum which actually functioned as it should.  It could be the backbone of the ward

But that requires a bishop who understands the potential and EQ members who do not see themselves as "toy soldiers" but the front line, where-the-rubber-meets-the-road true ministers of Christ dealing with problems directly as reported by the home teachers.  The president has the keys on his own.  If he doesn't see that, he needs training.

I have seen this work in a ward, and it is amazing.  The EQ president can be essentially a "vice bishop" and handle much of what a bishop routinely handles and free up the bishop to do only those duties which ONLY a bishop must handle.  

But they both need training that this is the right way to run a ward.  At that point, the EQ members become true ministers of the gospel, worried about their own little "flock" of members for whom they have priesthood responsibility.

All it takes is a little training and a change of attitude.

I think whenever people engage in an organization and serve in proactive ways, it results in a much better run organization.  The more people involved, and the less the burden falls on a few select individuals, the more smoothly things will run in general and the less arduous for those in leadership positions.  

One point I take some umbrage with, the whole who has keys and who doesn't is a modern explanatory and theological proposition that has no basis in reality, and is a distraction from an important principle.  That principle was articulated by Elder Uchtdorf very well a few years back in his talk about lifting where we stand.  I don't see the EQ President or the Bishop or any other calling as having significantly more "keys" than anyone else.  The emphasis on keys of authority is what i take issue with as I don't think its necessary, helpful, or really supported by doctrine.  Sorry, its a pet peeve of mine... 

 

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

I would probably agree with you that the manuals are not the very best in the world IF you follow them strictly.  However, with a good teacher that uses them as a guideline and then adapts them to the needs of the Quorum or Group then they serve their purpose well.

The manuals are actually best if you follow them strictly.  At least the ones they have now days.  The problem is that people either haven't read the introduction of they lack the skills to teach the way the manual asks you to teach.  

Quote

As you teach from this book, invite others to share their thoughts, ask questions, testify, and teach one another. When they actively participate, they will be more prepared to learn and to receive personal revelation.

Allow good discussions to continue rather than trying to cover all the teachings. Guide the discussions so they focus on President Hunter’s teachings.

There is more on that in the introduction.  

In some ward the teachers tend to get very heavy in the reading of the lesson and making sure they get through it all. I admit in classes like this I really struggle being in class.  It is especially bad if you are trying to prepare and read the lesson for yourself as well.  It would be really nice if someone could figure out a way to reach teachers like this and teach them better teaching methods.  The church has the resources.  Either people don't know about those resources or they don't make it a priority to learn from them. 

Edited May 19, 2016 by Rain

[cinepro]

12 hours ago, JarMan said:

So we've got a new EQP. He's a young guy with a young family, just graduated from BYU and teaches seminary for a living. He's a genuinely good guy and he decided to hand out a short survey on Sunday asking about what we liked and disliked in EQ.  I wrote down that I hate everything about EQ. I hate the manual. I hate home teaching. I hate being home taught. Elder's Quorum is the worst hour of my week unless my HT's were over that week, then it's the second worst hour. 

Anyway, I feel a twinge of regret about survey-ambushing him like that, but I answered honestly like he asked us to. So now that I've lain down on the virtual couch, can anyone tell me: am I normal or is it common to feel this dissatisfied with everything EQ related? 

Obviously, this issue pretty much comes down to what kind of people you have in EQ, and who you home teach and get taught by.  I'm lucky to be in an EQ with a lot of people who like to have fun and keep in entertaining (lots of jokes), and I really enjoy visiting with the families I home teach.  It's been a while since we've been visited by our Home Teacher, so no report there.

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

I think it depends on the elders quorum. Some wards just don't do a good job with priesthood lessons. That said, I very much agree with your thoughts on home teaching. Should I be worried that I agree with you?

It is a scary predicament.  Something has to be off - is the sky falling?  Cheers,

[Storm Rider]

6 minutes ago, Rain said:

The manuals are actually best if you follow them strictly.  At least the ones they have now days.  The problem is that people either haven't read the introduction of they lack the skills to teach the way the manual asks you to teach.  

There is more on that in the introduction.  

In some ward the teachers tend to get very heavy in the reading of the lesson and making sure they get through it all. I admit in classes like this I really struggle being in class.  It is especially bad if you are trying to prepare and read the lesson for yourself as well.  It would be really nice if someone could figure out a way to reach teachers like this and teach them better teaching methods.  The church has the resources.  Either people don't know about those resources or they don't make it a priority to learn from them. 

Absolutely detest someone that reads the lesson!  In addition, dislike those who feel every point must be made in the entire lesson and forces/limits discussion to ensure they meet their goal.  I would just as soon have a root canal than sit through that type of lesson.

Follow strictly?  Not so much - we will have to disagree.  However, it depends upon how you define follow strictly.  I teach all the time and always have.  I use the lesson outline; I use what I think best fits the needs of the group I am teaching.  I never cover all of the topics in the lesson because I tend to focus on a few points that will engage the group and begin a discussion that is centered on how the gospel principle applies to our lives today.  If this is what you mean, then we are saying the same thing.  If not.....well then, we teach differently.  

[Rain]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

There are only two leaders in a ward who actually hold priesthood keys: one is the bishop and the other is the Elder's Quorum president.  The HPGL is only leader of a "group" offshoot of the stake HP Quorum and has no keys.

 

There are 4. 

Quote

Members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles hold all the keys necessary for governing the Church. Only the President of the Church has the right to exercise all of those keys. He delegates these keys to others who preside in the Church—temple presidents, mission presidents, stake presidents, district presidents, bishops, branch presidents, and quorum presidents, including deacons and teachers quorum presidents.

Priesthood Keys

[Ahab]

11 minutes ago, Rain said:

The manuals are actually best if you follow them strictly.  At least the ones they have now days.  The problem is that people either haven't read the introduction of they lack the skills to teach the way the manual asks you to teach.  

There is more on that in the introduction.  

In some ward the teachers tend to get very heavy in the reading of the lesson and making sure they get through it all. I admit in classes like this I really struggle being in class.  It is especially bad if you are trying to prepare and read the lesson for yourself as well.  It would be really nice if someone could figure out a way to reach teachers like this and teach them better teaching methods.  The church has the resources.  Either people don't know about those resources or they don't make it a priority to learn from them. 

Thought provoking questions and comments are the keys to good teaching.  Saying things in strange ways that make people want to question what the heck you are talking about or what the heck you mean.  Trying to stay pretty much on topic, of course.  Getting people to think outside of the box or boxes they are accustomed to think in and helping them see different ways to see things they already think they know.  Common sense issues.  

It's all pretty much very basic material and hardly anybody ever says anything new.  Because there is hardly anything new to say. It's all the ssme stuff.  The same show. The same play. The only thing that changes are the actors. Us. But the curriculum,  what we need to know and learn, is and always will be the same.  From total ignorance to total perfection. 

[mfbukowski]

26 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

I think whenever people engage in an organization and serve in proactive ways, it results in a much better run organization.  The more people involved, and the less the burden falls on a few select individuals, the more smoothly things will run in general and the less arduous for those in leadership positions.  

One point I take some umbrage with, the whole who has keys and who doesn't is a modern explanatory and theological proposition that has no basis in reality, and is a distraction from an important principle.  That principle was articulated by Elder Uchtdorf very well a few years back in his talk about lifting where we stand.  I don't see the EQ President or the Bishop or any other calling as having significantly more "keys" than anyone else.  The emphasis on keys of authority is what i take issue with as I don't think its necessary, helpful, or really supported by doctrine.  Sorry, its a pet peeve of mine... 

 

The practicality of it is more pragmatic than theological, I think.  If you believe you are sealed for eternity for example, you are more likely to take that relationship seriously rather than go after the next pretty face you see.

Believing you have a God-given responsibility makes one feel that one really should take the responsibility seriously, as you should.

Quite honestly I think that is why men have the priesthood, to give them a psychological structure of leadership.  It is almost like a tribal thing, perhaps acting like hunting parties, where there are assigned roles of leadership.  You don't do your job, the village doesn't eat.  "You guys go to the right, and chase the buffalo this way and then we will go to the left and get him with our spears".  Kind of like American football, actually as well. 

Pregnant and nursing women are not going to go out and chase down game.  Lose the baby and the village loses a valuable member.  It's hard to nurse while running with a spear, and if men don't get off their duffs smoking funny stuff in the medicine house, nobody is going to eat.

I think evolutionary forces have programmed men to think that way about leadership and is largely what gets up off the couch to go to work and earn a living or even do our home teaching.  

Keys have a very practical purpose- it defines who has specific responsibilities. Yes of course all should participate but without an organization to participate IN- with leaders- there is nothing.  Someone has to call the meeting together and determine the purpose of the meeting to participate IN.  THAT is the person with the "keys"- whatever the term, THAT is the function. That is the way groups work

Edited May 19, 2016 by mfbukowski

[Rain]

7 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Absolutely detest someone that reads the lesson!  In addition, dislike those who feel every point must be made in the entire lesson and forces/limits discussion to ensure they meet their goal.  I would just as soon have a root canal than sit through that type of lesson.

Follow strictly?  Not so much - we will have to disagree.  However, it depends upon how you define follow strictly.  I teach all the time and always have.  I use the lesson outline; I use what I think best fits the needs of the group I am teaching.  I never cover all of the topics in the lesson because I tend to focus on a few points that will engage the group and begin a discussion that is centered on how the gospel principle applies to our lives today.  If this is what you mean, then we are saying the same thing.  If not.....well then, we teach differently.  

You are describing what I quoted and said we should follow strictly. What I quoted and how the manual tells us to teach is:

Quote

As you teach from this book, invite others to share their thoughts, ask questions, testify, and teach one another. When they actively participate, they will be more prepared to learn and to receive personal revelation.

Allow good discussions to continue rather than trying to cover all the teachings. Guide the discussions so they focus on President Hunter’s teachings.

As one reads the introduction more as I suggested then you also see how the manual tells you to help apply to gospel in our lives etc.  

Basically what I am saying is that most people do NOT follow the manual strictly because they don't follow all the great information that is given in the introduction.  I would guess that 95% of teachers don't even read that part.  Now I'm curious.  I'll have to do a poll and see what comes up here.  

[mfbukowski]

16 minutes ago, Rain said:

There are 4. 

Priesthood Keys

I said "in the ward".  Trust me.  I have endured endless lectures on this point and spend 8 hours every Sunday dealing with this information on some basis or other.

It is not likely the deacons or teachers will counsel families on their finances, and even as adults the Melchizadek priesthood is required for that kind of role which automatically eliminates them

Edited May 19, 2016 by mfbukowski

[Mars]

i thought the point of 'lift where you stand' was to stop hemming and hawing about the best way to get something done and just do what you can, trusting others to do what they can, and the job gets done.

[JAHS]

45 minutes ago, bluebell said:

My husband was just set a part as a member of the EQP and the stake president met with the presidency privately for 2 hours to train them.  The bulk of that training was being told that they are responsible for the prospective elders in the ward and to get HT to function so that it's a help and not a hinderance.  Are these assignments something that is at the discretion of the SP or are they delineated in the handbook?

"When a household is not headed by a Melchizedek Priesthood holder, the bishopric determines whether that household should have home teachers from the elders quorum or the high priests group. In making this decision, the bishopric may consult with the priesthood executive committee and ward council." (CHI)

Who gets home taught by who is a policy determined by the Stake President and Bishop. Generally speaking Elders visit elders families and High Priests visit High priest families. But in our stake the policy is for High Priests to visit all homes that don't have Melchizedek priesthood holders; including widows, single women, and all prospective elders. 

[JAHS]

51 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Not really.  The reality is that the HPGL does not have keys and the EQ president does.

Yes but the Stake President does hold keys for the High Priest Group, so we operate according to his direction in our wards along with that of the Bishop for certain circumstances. We do whatever is prudent for the ward. Most elders have young families and professions and schooling that take up their time, whereas many High Priests are retired or close to it with all kids gone from the home, so they may have more time to take care of more things the ward needs.

[Rain]

27 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I said "in the ward".  Trust me.  I have endured endless lectures on this point and spend 8 hours every Sunday dealing with this information on some basis or other.

It is not likely the deacons or teachers will counsel families on their finances, and even as adults the Melchizadek priesthood is required for that kind of role which automatically eliminates them

I caught "in the ward" which is why I went to LDS.org and saw this:

Quote

 The deacons quorum president is one of only four people in the ward who hold keys of presidency.  Sacred keys...

before responding. I also understand that the boys will not have the responsibilities that the men will have.  Not planning on lecturing or debating it.  Just feel it is important for some, including my sons, to know as I find many who do not know.

[Rain]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

My husband was just set a part as a member of the EQP and the stake president met with the presidency privately for 2 hours to train them.  The bulk of that training was being told that they are responsible for the prospective elders in the ward and to get HT to function so that it's a help and not a hinderance.  Are these assignments something that is at the discretion of the SP or are they delineated in the handbook?

I would ask to also have him keep in mind those who are not prospective elders, but for all intents and purposes are though I know they may be few and that's why they are not talked about.  I only say this because they may not come up on the list as prospective - my son was ordained, but never started in any way the missionary process or going to the temple etc.  The bishop just felt it was "time" for him to be ordained.