Missionaries detained by police

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

Eh, if it is seen as a bribe, so be it.  Personally I'd see it more as a reward than a bribe, but since I know some people in the Church who make some really good cookies, and I also really like some kinds of chips, and sodas too, I would not be adverse to the idea of people saying they were trying to bribe me into joining the Church to partake of all the good stuff they would give me if I joined them, or otherwise participated in the baptizing.

I would probably get that green jello with the carrots ya know? 

[Ahab]

6 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I would probably get that green jello with the carrots ya know? 

Somebody is messing up somewhere.   The green jello is lime flavored and is not intended to be mixed with carrots.  That would be like eating lime flavored carrots. My tongue would be screaming out something like:  Ew!

Instead, the lime flavored jello should be mixed with something like... hmm, I don't know for sure, but something else other than carrots.  Something with graham crackers, maybe.  And whipped cream, maybe.  To taste something like key lime pie.

Orange jello, on the other hand, would be good with something like carrots.

[Jeanne]

5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Somebody is messing up somewhere.   The green jello is lime flavored and is not intended to be mixed with carrots.  That would be like eating lime flavored carrots. My tongue would be screaming out something like:  Ew!

Instead, the lime flavored jello should be mixed with something like... hmm, I don't know for sure, but something else other than carrots.  Something with graham crackers, maybe.  And whipped cream, maybe.  To taste something like key lime pie.

Orange jello, on the other hand, would be good with something like carrots.

Well I guess..I tend to like my jello with jello.  Actually though..lime isn't bad with pineapple

[Ahab]

31 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 To bring as many people happiness as possible.

That could be done with cookies, alone. 

[Jim Stiles]

37 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

No.  It means there are inactives.  That is not being dishonest.  If your father wanted off the rolls, all he had to do was ask, like I did.  Your comment is you being dishonest.

 

Most churches in the United States will take you off their rolls, if you do not show up at church for a year or two.  People outside of the LDS church should take that into consideration when comparing the quoted statistics of the LDS church against the quoted statistics of other denominations.

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Well I guess..I tend to like my jello with jello.  Actually though..lime isn't bad with pineapple

Okay,  yeah, and cottage cheese.

And some pistachio nuts too.

No, wait, that is all better with the pistachio flavored jello.

Lime jello with all of that wouldn't be too bad, though.

[Jeanne]

Just now, Ahab said:

Okay,  yeah, and cottage cheese.

And some pistachio nuts too.

No, wait, that is all better with the pistachio flavored jello.

Lime jello with all of that wouldn't be too bad, though.

I love jello cake!!!

[Jim Stiles]

37 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 To bring as many people happiness as possible.

How does baptizing someone with very little knowledge of the LDS church further that goal?  Others in this folder have mentioned people being baptized without knowledge of Joseph Smith Jr.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

I did. As I mentioned I was the DL when that missionary had the 27 "volleyball baps." I told the ZLs, and they didn't care.

Why did you stop there, if you thought it was wrong? I would have told about it in my very next weekly letter to the mission president, if not making an immediate phone call.

Was this the only incident you personally observed? You said it happened "a lot."

Edited June 14, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said:

Most churches in the United States will take you off their rolls, if you do not show up at church for a year or two.  People outside of the LDS church should take that into consideration when comparing the quoted statistics of the LDS church against the quoted statistics of other denominations.

Most churches in the United States are loosely associated, autonomous congregations. Comparing them to the Church of Jesus Christ, which has a centralized ecclesiastical model and has a unique self-identity as being the Church that Christ Himself established on earth to be His instrument to bring salvation to humankind is  comparing apples to organges.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Why did you stop there, if you thought it was wrong? I would have told about it in my weekly letter to the mission president, if not making an immediate phone call.

Was this the only incident you personally observed? You said it happened "a lot."

I am pretty sure I did put it in my weekly letter.  I learned when I was in the office that the APs read the letters and selected the ones they thought the MP should see. Of course, these were the APs who had AC-DC cranked in the jeep when they picked us up at the airport when we arrived from the MTC. 

[Scott Lloyd]

5 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I am pretty sure I did put it in my weekly letter.  I learned when I was in the office that the APs read the letters and selected the ones they thought the MP should see. Of course, these were the APs who had AC-DC cranked in the jeep when they picked us up at the airport when we arrived from the MTC. 

Did you ever mention it in an interview with the mission president?

If I had an inkling that my weekly letters were being screened and vital information that the president needed to know wasn't getting through, I would have taken other steps, such as writing home about it and suggesting that my parents contact the Missionary Department. I know I wouldn't have let the matter rest.

And did you mention in your interview with the president after you got to the office that the assistants were listening to hard-rock music when they picked you up from the airport?

It's sounding to me like you let a lot of things get past you while you were a missionary. And today you are being implicitly critical of the Church and its leadership for allowing irregularities to take place in the mission field. They can't deal with such things if they never hear about them.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Did you ever mention it in an interview with the mission president?

If I had an inkling that my weekly letters were being screened and vital information that the president needed to know wasn't getting through, I would have taken other steps, such as writing home about it and suggesting that my parents contact the Missionary Department. I know I wouldn't have let the matter rest.

And did you mention in your interview with the president after you got to the office that the assistants were listening to hard-rock music when they picked you up from the airport?

It's sounding to me like you let a lot of things get past you while you were a missionary. And today you are being implicitly critical of the Church and its leadership for allowing irregularities to take place in the mission field. They can't deal with such things if they never hear about them.

I didn't have an interview with the mission president. We had dinner with them and a group of missionaries going home (one of whom said "I would slit my wrists if I were you"). I suppose I should have said something, but I'd been on a plane for 21 hours followed by several hours at the immigration office before dinner. 

How exactly was I supposed to communicate with the mission president? We had no phone, and I just checked my journal: I did write that in my weekly letter. Mind you, after dinner ended, I never saw or heard from that mission president again, as he went home 5 months later and did not come to La Paz again. 

The only implicit criticism is that I have expressed hope that this numbers culture end. I stand by that. 

[jkwilliams]

I guess we sort of had an interview. While we were waiting for our food, the mp asked if we had received the mission handbook in the mail. We said we had, and he asked, Do you have any questions? We didn't. 

[Storm Rider]

33 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said:

Most churches in the United States will take you off their rolls, if you do not show up at church for a year or two.  People outside of the LDS church should take that into consideration when comparing the quoted statistics of the LDS church against the quoted statistics of other denominations.

Jim, you do get that you are carrying around a big, butt of a an axe and don't make sense to boot.

When a member is no longer at their address and no on in the ward knows where the member is their name is returned to Salt Lake.  There are people in Salt Lake City that actually contact family members in order to find out where they are so that the member's records can be forwarded to the proper ward or branch.  A member is not "lost" or "taken off the rolls" for a period of time.  

And I would love to compare our membership records with any other church in the United States or the world.  Please ask us to compare our records to the Catholic Church or the Orthodox; please let us compare our records against the Southern Baptists, Episcopalians, etc.  The LDS Church actually keeps track of people quite effectively other denominations don't have as effective a program for keeping track of members.  

You may need to chill a little on this because you don't appear to know what you are talking about.  

[Rain]

15 hours ago, Analytics said:

The forms are called "baptism records."  Did you have many baptisms?  It would have been filled out during the baptismal interview with the district leader.

Once some sisters in my zone had a baptism, and the zone leader changed the name on the form so that he personally got credit for the baptism rather than the sisters.  His justification for doing this was since sisters couldn't progress up the priesthood hierarchy anyway, their baptisms were wasted.  It's better that the credit goes to somebody who could use it.

I had several and I know that I got "credit" for one because I remember it was on the newsletter and the baptism was long after I moved out of the area - she was an investigator for a long time.  I know I didn't sign that form.  It's possible I just don't remember the others - I really have a poor memory.  It didn't really matter to me to get credit.  I was just concerned, at the time, that I wasn't obedient/faithful enough to help investigators get to that step. Now when we got Top Dog (I think that was the name) for tracting one month for most tracting I was proud of that!

Edited June 15, 2016 by Rain

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, mapman said:

It is true that this is the way it is supposed to work. In my experience (it sounds like others' experiences have varied) missionaries are able to take advantage of members not understanding church policies and procedures. My last area was a small town with few members, most of them recent converts, who as a whole had little idea how a branch was actually supposed to function. The entire history of the branch (about 10 years) they were accustomed to not following the correct procedures. Apparently some missionaries find this situation very tempting and take advantage of the situation. My zone leaders didn't care about following the church's policies with things like ensuring that they follow the word of wisdom, attend church a few times, have a baptismal interview by someone other than the missionaries baptizing, etc. The members didn't understand nor care either. The only reason things got any better was because me and my companion cared and I told my mission president what was happening.

My zone leaders managed to get more baptisms than the other zones in the mission the transfer before I got there because they had went and baptized a guy they had met earlier in the day on the last day of the transfer. I found it despicable and a mockery of sacred things, but it was something that happened. It still makes me angry when I think about it. Some people just aren't in the mission field for the right reasons I guess.

Wouldn't it be nice if all missionaries really wanted to go.  So many are going for the wrong reasons. Pleasing Mom and Dad is nice...but that should not be the reason  to go.  If one is old enough to go out on a mission..he/she is old enough to decide for themselves without judgement.

[Scott Lloyd]

26 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I didn't have an interview with the mission president. We had dinner with them and a group of missionaries going home (one of whom said "I would slit my wrists if I were you"). I suppose I should have said something, but I'd been on a plane for 21 hours followed by several hours at the immigration office before dinner. 

I heard the "slit my wrists" joke too, but that's all it was, a joke, and everyone understood that. Another one was "You might get my son as a greenie."

I was under the impression that a personal interview with each missionary entering the mission was standard procedure. Perhaps I was wrong. But I don't buy it that through two years, you never had the opportunity to communicate in private with the mission president, either through a letter or a personal interview.

Quote

How exactly was I supposed to communicate with the mission president? We had no phone, and I just checked my journal: I did write that in my weekly letter. Mind you, after dinner ended, I never saw or heard from that mission president again, as he went home 5 months later and did not come to La Paz again. 

What about the irregularities in baptism procedures? Surely you had some means to convey that to the mission president at some point in time (the incoming one if note the outgoing one). You said it "happened a lot." If the mission president was totally in the dark about it the whole time, I'd call that a grave situation, and somebody somewhere should have blown the whistle, even if it meant writing home about it and having parents contact Church headquarters.

Quote

The only implicit criticism is that I have expressed hope that this numbers culture end. I stand by that. 

Again, if there is serious impropriety or wrongdoing going on, the mission president or other Church leaders can hardly deal with it unless they know about it.

And to complain about it years later when one did not make adequate efforts to report it seems a bit, well, audacious.

Edited June 14, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

I heard the "slit my wrists" joke too, but that's all it was, a joke, and everyone understood that. Another one was "You might get my son as a greenie."

I was under the impression that a personal interview with each missionary entering the mission was standard procedure. Perhaps I was wrong. But I don't buy it that through two years, you never had the opportunity to communicate in private with the mission president, either through a letter or a personal interview.

What about the irregularities in baptism procedures? Surely you had some means to convey that to the mission president at some point in time (the incoming one if note the outgoing one). You said it "happened a lot." If the mission president was totally in the dark about it the whole time, I'd call that a grave situation, and somebody somewhere should have blown the whistle, even if it meant writing home about it and having parents contact Church headquarters.

Again, if there is serious impropriety or wrongdoing going on, the mission president or other Church leaders can hardly deal with it unless they know about it.

And to complain about it years later when one did not make adequate efforts to report seems a bit, well, audacious.

Please stop trying to make this about my personal failings as a missionary, of which there were many. As I said, the only reason I brought up my mission is that several people here said missionaries padding numbers was an anomaly. It wasn't in my mission. And from what others have said, my experience wasn't unique. 

If I didn't do enough to report bad behavior, I accept that's on me. But I will say that when the mp set the ridiculous goals, everyone knew corners were being cut. If the mission president didn't know, it was willful ignorance. 

[Rain]

5 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

I guess we sort of had an interview. While we were waiting for our food, the mp asked if we had received the mission handbook in the mail. We said we had, and he asked, Do you have any questions? We didn't. 

So different than my mission.  We had an individual interview in his office.  I don't remember if it was that afternoon or the next morning.  That night we slept at member's homes in the ward.  The next morning we went to a testimony meeting where those going home spoke.  Then our new companions took us to our area. 

Edited June 15, 2016 by Rain

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, Rain said:

So different than my mission.  We had an indivisible interview in his office.  I don't remember if it was that afternoon or the next morning.  That night we slept at member's homes in the ward.  The next morning we went to a testimony meeting where those going home spoke.  Then our new companions took us to our area. 

After dinner, a very dirty and sunburned missionary showed up and said he was my new companion. He asked if he could use our hotel room shower because he hadn't had his weekly shower.

That night we were awakened by the local ZLs, who said they were out of gas and wondered if they could spend the night. We didn't know better, so I ended up sharing a twin bed with my companion. 

The next morning my companion came back, and we drove up to our area in a taxi. By the time we got there, I had a bad case of altitude sickness. 

[toon]

25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I heard the "slit my wrists" joke too, but that's all it was, a joke, and everyone understood that. Another one was "You might get my son as a greenie."

I was under the impression that a personal interview with each missionary entering the mission was standard procedure. Perhaps I was wrong. But I don't buy it that through two years, you never had the opportunity to communicate in private with the mission president, either through a letter or a personal interview.

What about the irregularities in baptism procedures? Surely you had some means to convey that to the mission president at some point in time (the incoming one if note the outgoing one). You said it "happened a lot." If the mission president was totally in the dark about it the whole time, I'd call that a grave situation, and somebody somewhere should have blown the whistle, even if it meant writing home about it and having parents contact Church headquarters.

Again, if there is serious impropriety or wrongdoing going on, the mission president or other Church leaders can hardly deal with it unless they know about it.

And to complain about it years later when one did not make adequate efforts to report it seems a bit, well, audacious.

Wow.  Just wow.  You really are a piece of work!

[Scott Lloyd]

34 minutes ago, Rain said:

So different than my mission.  We had an indivisible interview in his office.  I don't remember if it was that afternoon or the next morning.  That night we slept at member's homes in the ward.  The next morning we went to a testimony meeting where those going home spoke.  Then our new companions took us to our area. 

jkwilliams is portraying his mission experience as his having had little or no one-on-one contact with the mission president and having his letters screened so he could never be sure they were getting through.

I have to say that strikes me as very odd.

In my mission, one could expect to be interviewed personally and in private several times by the mission president: once upon arrival, once just before departure for home, and once during each and every zone conference, which were held frequently. And we knew our letters were being read, as the president would often send back brief, handwritten memos to individual missionaries based on what he had read in the missionary's letter.

This was the case with each of my mission presidents, and I had three, as one went home about a year after I arrived, and the mission was divided just before I went home and I ended up in the new mission.

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

24 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Please stop trying to make this about my personal failings as a missionary, of which there were many. As I said, the only reason I brought up my mission is that several people here said missionaries padding numbers was an anomaly. It wasn't in my mission. And from what others have said, my experience wasn't unique. 

 

The only reason I'm making an issue of it is that you appear to be joining in with others in making blanket system-wide criticisms of the missionary organization in the Church based on your own mission experience. I just find that odd behavior if one personally observed irregularities, had opportunities to bring them to light and didn't avail himself of such opportunities.

Quote

If I didn't do enough to report bad behavior, I accept that's on me. But I will say that when the mp set the ridiculous goals, everyone knew corners were being cut. If the mission president didn't know, it was willful ignorance. 

In concept, I don't excuse making ridiculous requirements. But had the mission president not been kept in the dark, perhaps he would have set more realisitic expectations.

[Jim Stiles]

47 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Jim, you do get that you are carrying around a big, butt of a an axe and don't make sense to boot.

When a member is no longer at their address and no on in the ward knows where the member is their name is returned to Salt Lake.  There are people in Salt Lake City that actually contact family members in order to find out where they are so that the member's records can be forwarded to the proper ward or branch.  A member is not "lost" or "taken off the rolls" for a period of time.  

And I would love to compare our membership records with any other church in the United States or the world.  Please ask us to compare our records to the Catholic Church or the Orthodox; please let us compare our records against the Southern Baptists, Episcopalians, etc.  The LDS Church actually keeps track of people quite effectively other denominations don't have as effective a program for keeping track of members.  

You may need to chill a little on this because you don't appear to know what you are talking about.  

Hey, I know where Charles Town is:

http://www.journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/632521/Appeals-court-to-hear-sexual-abuse-case.html?nav=5006

If someone does not attend church at all for a year or two, the assumption in real churches is that they no longer wish to be associated with that denomination, or with Christianity at all.  TSCC holds a cult-like grip on its former members with the hopes that they will someday start tithing again.