jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2016 Author Posted June 17, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: No. But I think one would be justified in seeking other recourses when it became clear his concerns were not being responded to. You reminded me of a Bolivian guy I knew who was assigned to a city up in the mountains. Somehow, they lost the lease on their building, and the presiding bishopric's office found them another place to meet. Attendance dropped off drastically, and eventually the missionaries discovered that the place had been a brothel previously. This missionary wrote to the mission president, who told him he was going to have to live with it. He was made of stronger moral fiber than I was, obviously, because he wrote a letter to President Kimball. A month or so later, the mission president showed up in the city, and he was quite angry. But they did get moved to another place.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 7 hours ago, jkwilliams said: Again, you really should watch that Ted Lyon video, where he explains that missionaries were doing what their mission president wanted them to do (in this case, the 2-hour baptisms), so as far as they were concerned, the work of the Lord was going great in Chile. Before I watch the video, can you tell me whether Lyon was a mission president in the age of Preach My Gospel? That has been roughly in the last decade or so. I ask, because in light of the chapter I posted, and having been a fly on the wall, as it were, at seminars for new mission presidents, I can scarcely imagine a mission president going off the rails this badly. A newly minted missionary, one who does not have a lot of maturity or greatly developed sense of judgment, I can see. But a mission president? By the way, while looking just now for information on when Preach My Gospel originated, I ran across this Religious Studies Center article on the history of Preach My Gospel. It looks to be quite interesting, and I look forward to reading it. Perhaps it will provide some enlightenment or answer some questions about past practices with regard to missionary work as opposed to what's going on today.
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2016 Author Posted June 17, 2016 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Before I watch the video, can you tell me whether Lyon was a mission president in the age of Preach My Gospel? That has been roughly in the last decade or so. I ask, because in light of the chapter I posted, and having been a fly on the wall, as it were, at seminars for new mission presidents, I can scarcely imagine a mission president going off the rails this badly. A newly minted missionary, one who does not have a lot of maturity or greatly developed sense of judgment, I can see. But a mission president? By the way, while looking just now for information on when Preach My Gospel originated, I ran across this Religious Studies Center article on the history of Preach My Gospel. It looks to be quite interesting, and I look forward to reading it. Perhaps it will provide some enlightenment or answer some questions about past practices with regard to missionary work as opposed to what's going on today. Given that he was mp from 1997-2000, that's probably before. Implementing such a program doesn't necessarily preclude missionaries slipping into bad patterns.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 2 hours ago, jkwilliams said: Given that he was mp from 1997-2000, that's probably before. Implementing such a program doesn't necessarily preclude missionaries slipping into bad patterns. As I've indicated, I've seen at least a top-down emphasis on Preach My Gospel that apparently has been intense enough to leave everyone involved in full time missionary work these days without excuse.
jkwilliams Posted June 17, 2016 Author Posted June 17, 2016 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: As I've indicated, I've seen at least a top-down emphasis on Preach My Gospel that apparently has been intense enough to leave everyone involved in full time missionary work these days without excuse. Sure, but that doesn't mean it doesn't ever happen.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Sure, but that doesn't mean it doesn't ever happen. I didn't say it never happens. consig has already beaten that straw man senseless; your blows would be redundant.
UtahTexan Posted June 18, 2016 Posted June 18, 2016 So...been reading the pages and pages of this. No new info...just those who want to complaining and those who are faithful being positive....looking around, I see at least a dozen dead horses that were beaten. Shall we bring in other herd of dead ones?
Scott Lloyd Posted June 20, 2016 Posted June 20, 2016 On 6/17/2016 at 7:12 PM, CountryBoy said: So...been reading the pages and pages of this. No new info...just those who want to complaining and those who are faithful being positive....looking around, I see at least a dozen dead horses that were beaten. Shall we bring in other herd of dead ones? This pretty much sums it up, I'm afraid.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 20, 2016 Posted June 20, 2016 On 6/17/2016 at 1:52 PM, jkwilliams said: You reminded me of a Bolivian guy I knew who was assigned to a city up in the mountains. Somehow, they lost the lease on their building, and the presiding bishopric's office found them another place to meet. Attendance dropped off drastically, and eventually the missionaries discovered that the place had been a brothel previously. This missionary wrote to the mission president, who told him he was going to have to live with it. He was made of stronger moral fiber than I was, obviously, because he wrote a letter to President Kimball. A month or so later, the mission president showed up in the city, and he was quite angry. But they did get moved to another place. With a directive from the prophet, he had no business being angry. He should have been graciously humble.
jkwilliams Posted June 22, 2016 Author Posted June 22, 2016 On 6/20/2016 at 3:19 AM, Scott Lloyd said: With a directive from the prophet, he had no business being angry. He should have been graciously humble. He was angry that the elder had gone over his head and a little embarrassed that this missionary had attracted the attention of the prophet. Angry is probably not the right word. Livid, maybe.
jkwilliams Posted June 22, 2016 Author Posted June 22, 2016 Another comment from my friend who served in Chile: "I am struck by the continued assertions of some in that thread that local leadership would not have allowed this to happen. What local leadership? In my first branch the branch president only showed up to church when he had been drinking and he was usually the only member who did show up. Anyone else there was investigators we brought. "It is just silly to think that these people were anymore informed than we missionaries were and none of us would recognize a membership record if we saw one. Correlation was just starting to hit stride toward the end of my mission and one of the things President Bradford did was to open up a church distribution center in downtown Santiago where members could get all the necessary manuals for each organization. He then took 10-12 senior companionships and brought them into the mission home for a two week training session on all the church manuals after which they were sent back out to their branches and districts with instructions to spend their time teaching the contents of these manuals to local leadership. In many cases these missionaries were teaching local branch and district leadership who had no idea such manuals existed let alone any clue of their content. So, to question why local leadership would allow the shenanigans you and others keep describing on their missions is to incorrectly assume they knew what they were doing or, as in many cases, that such leadership even existed." I sincerely hope things have improved since then. As I said, I posted the OP because it seemed pretty obvious what was going on, and it was a little disappointing to me that such things still happen, even in the era of "Preach My Gospel."
Bernard Gui Posted June 25, 2016 Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) On June 22, 2016 at 4:57 AM, jkwilliams said: Another comment from my friend who served in Chile: "I am struck by the continued assertions of some in that thread that local leadership would not have allowed this to happen. What local leadership? In my first branch the branch president only showed up to church when he had been drinking and he was usually the only member who did show up. Anyone else there was investigators we brought. "It is just silly to think that these people were anymore informed than we missionaries were and none of us would recognize a membership record if we saw one. Correlation was just starting to hit stride toward the end of my mission and one of the things President Bradford did was to open up a church distribution center in downtown Santiago where members could get all the necessary manuals for each organization. He then took 10-12 senior companionships and brought them into the mission home for a two week training session on all the church manuals after which they were sent back out to their branches and districts with instructions to spend their time teaching the contents of these manuals to local leadership. In many cases these missionaries were teaching local branch and district leadership who had no idea such manuals existed let alone any clue of their content. So, to question why local leadership would allow the shenanigans you and others keep describing on their missions is to incorrectly assume they knew what they were doing or, as in many cases, that such leadership even existed." I sincerely hope things have improved since then. As I said, I posted the OP because it seemed pretty obvious what was going on, and it was a little disappointing to me that such things still happen, even in the era of "Preach My Gospel." Well, call me silly, but my experience as a Central American missionary in the 1960s directly contradicts your claims. I served as mission secretary and one of my duties was to keep track of baptisms and new membership records. We had no bishops, and there were some sketchy branch presidents in out-of-the-way places, but we elders kept an eye on things and the mission president or the zone leaders came around frequently. In some branches the missionaries served as bps. The system was obviously not as spiffy as it is today, but it was in place and if the president and his staff exercised due diligence, the system worked. Of course there were abuses. There always are when we deal with human beings. Edited June 25, 2016 by Bernard Gui 1
Bernard Gui Posted June 25, 2016 Posted June 25, 2016 In Central America, we had the legends of legions of basketball and teen-age girl baptisms performed by previous generations of missionaries, but I could not verify those at the time. It didn't happen while I was there. Our presidents emphasized baptism of families and potential priesthood holders and leaders.
Recommended Posts