amo Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 Is Home Teaching the only way to fulfill this command ? " The priest’s duty is to ... visit the house of each member" , D&C 20:47 (bold & italics mine). Thx for your input, Amo
CV75 Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 32 minutes ago, amo said: Is Home Teaching the only way to fulfill this command ? " The priest’s duty is to ... visit the house of each member" , D&C 20:47 (bold & italics mine). Thx for your input, Amo I think not, but whatever he does, it needs to be under the direction of his president. I don't think this verse is to be taken as an individual commission to act independently of the quorum. We have D&C 58:26-29 that allows for that, and it isn't a commission. 1
mfbukowski Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 Sometimes visiting is actually not the most appropriate thing to do with highly inactives and people who have asked not to be contacted Sometimes a personal note or card or a mailed lesson is the most appropriate solution- the key is letting the member know that you care and love them, even if perhaps they do not want to see you. It can be like a member of the family with some enmity toward your side of the family or whatever- you need to reach out and do your best to resolve the issue without being too pushy. My entire home teaching list is made of people who have asked not to be contacted- and I have found that showing up, in some cases, can be the worst thing you can do. We have been counseled recently to follow the spirit in these matters https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2016/10/emissaries-to-the-church?lang=eng Quote Brethren, may we briefly examine the priesthood duty that has been described as “the Church’s first source of help” to its individuals and families.2 Entire forests have been sacrificed providing the paper to organize it and then reorganize it. A thousand pep talks have been given trying to encourage it. Certainly no Freudian travel agency anywhere could possibly arrange the number of guilt trips this subject has provoked. Yet still we struggle to achieve anywhere near an acceptable standard of performance regarding the Lord’s commandment “to watch over the church always”3through priesthood home teaching. Part of the challenge we face is the changing demographics of the Church. We know that with our membership now spread across more than 30,000 wards and branches, located in some 188 nations and territories, it is much more challenging to visit the homes of our brothers and sisters than it was in the early days of the Church when neighbor taught neighbor in something called “block teaching.” Furthermore, in many units of the Church, there is a limited number of available priesthood bearers to do home teaching, leaving those who can serve with as many as 18 or 20 families—or more—to care for. There can also be issues of long distances to travel, the high cost and low availability of transportation, and the extended length of the local workday and workweek. Add to these some cultural taboos against uninvited home visits and the safety issues that exist in many of the world’s neighborhoods—well, we begin to see the complexity of the problem. Brethren, in the best of all worlds and in those circumstances where it can be done, a monthly visit in each home is still the ideal the Church would strive for. But realizing that in many locations around the world achieving such an ideal is not possible and that we cause those brethren to feel like failures when we ask them to do what cannot realistically be done, the First Presidency wrote to the priesthood leaders of the Church in December 2001, giving this inspired, very helpful counsel: “There are some locations in the Church,” they wrote, “where … home teaching to every home each month may not be possible because of insufficient numbers of active priesthood brethren and various other local challenges.” We’ve mentioned some of them. “When such circumstances prevail,” they go on, “leaders should do their best to use the resources they have available to watch over and strengthen each member.”4 Brethren, if in my ward or branch I faced these kinds of difficult circumstances, my Aaronic Priesthood companion and I would apply the First Presidency’s counsel (which is now handbook policy) in this way: First, however many months it took to achieve it, we would pursue the scriptural mandate to “visit the house of each member,”5 establishing a schedule that would get us to those homes on a calendar that was both possible and practical. Built into that schedule would be the prioritization of our available time and frequency of contacts to those who need us the most—investigators the missionaries are teaching, newly baptized converts, those who are ill, the lonely, the less active, single-parent families with children still at home, and so forth. While working through our schedule to visit all homes, which may take some months to accomplish, we would make other kinds of contact with the individuals and families on our list via any of the means the Lord has provided. Certainly we would watch for our families at church and, as the scripture says, would “speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls.”6 In addition, we would make phone calls, send emails and text messages, even tap out a greeting through one of the many forms of social media available to us. To help address special needs, we might send a scriptural quote or a line from a general conference talk or a Mormon Message drawn from the wealth of material on LDS.org. In the language of the First Presidency, we would do the best we could in the circumstances we faced with the resources available to us. Brethren, the appeal I am making tonight is for you to lift your vision of home teaching. Please, in newer, better ways see yourselves as emissaries of the Lord to His children. That means leaving behind the tradition of a frantic, law of Moses–like, end-of-the-month calendar in which you rush to give a scripted message from the Church magazines that the family has already read. We would hope, rather, that you will establish an era of genuine, gospel-oriented concern for the members, watching over and caring for each other, addressing spiritual and temporal needs in any way that helps. Now, as for what “counts” as home teaching, every good thing you do “counts,” so report it all! Indeed, the report that matters most is how you have blessed and cared for those within your stewardship, which has virtually nothing to do with a specific calendar or a particular location. What matters is that you love your people and are fulfilling the commandment “to watch over the church always.”7 I am also a student of latin amo amas amat What matters is that we LOVE and strive to visit each home, but sometimes that is not the best solution under the circumstances. 3
thatjimguy Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 It should be the default way, because, by default, it shouldn't be a problem or an issue. However, like most things, there going to be exceptions, just as long as they are legit. How do you know if it is legit?..........prepare for the broken record......Use the spirit. 1
Five Solas Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 3 hours ago, mfbukowski said: ... My entire home teaching list is made of people who have asked not to be contacted... Heh, maybe you should stop trying to make them watch videos of Richard Rorty... ;0) --Erik PS. But I'd still have a beer with you, should you find yourself in Seattle sometime (you'll drink something else, of course)
mfbukowski Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 3 minutes ago, Five Solas said: Heh, maybe you should stop trying to make them watch videos of Richard Rorty... ;0) --Erik PS. But I'd still have a beer with you, should you find yourself in Seattle sometime (you'll drink something else, of course) Diet Dr. Pepper is about as risque as I get nowadays, but sounds good to me. Of course I will have to bring my computer to play more videos.....
Boanerges Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 5 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Sometimes visiting is actually not the most appropriate thing to do with highly inactives and people who have asked not to be contacted Sometimes a personal note or card or a mailed lesson is the most appropriate solution- the key is letting the member know that you care and love them, even if perhaps they do not want to see you. It can be like a member of the family with some enmity toward your side of the family or whatever- you need to reach out and do your best to resolve the issue without being too pushy. My entire home teaching list is made of people who have asked not to be contacted- and I have found that showing up, in some cases, can be the worst thing you can do. What matters is that we LOVE and strive to visit each home, but sometimes that is not the best solution under the circumstances. My list is similar, mostly people we don't contact monthly. Our stake has guidelines for people that should be contacted monthly (usually the most needy), those who can be visited less often, those who can be visited even less often, and those who we contact only via mail, email, or phone. I requested a route of those who we contact less often and said they could give me more than the normal 4 or 5 families "normal" routes have. I have about 12 families that I mostly send notes to but I also know where a couple of them work and stop by and say hi. Some of them I don;t really contact because I respect that hey have requested no contact and I respect that. And, I only report third months of quarters because that's the only one that counts. So all the contacts I do I report the third month.
Popular Post Garden Girl Posted November 21, 2016 Popular Post Posted November 21, 2016 (edited) To my brothers... for those times when your stewardship weighs on you when it comes to your home teaching... let me share my experience today... Most of you know that I've been widowed for the past 18 years (Dec 1998). Also that my husband was non-LDS (although he was leaning more toward the Church since I reactivated 3 years before his death) so a year after his death I was sealed to him... it is my home teachers who have brought the priesthood into my home, particularly my current ones who are absolutely faithful in their responsibility... I never have to run after them or call them... they are always there every month and make it known I can call on them if ever I need anything. This is a comfort to a 76-year old widow with no children (also, my family is in the mid-west). For the past several weeks, I have been troubled with a knee that is so painful I can barely walk (just had an MRI etc and hope to get resolution soon). I have missed Church of course... and taking the sacrament. So today my home teachers visited me, administered the sacrament to me, and gave me a priesthood blessing... words cannot tell you what this meant to me... what they mean to me... as friends, as HTs, as spiritual brothers, and the comfort they give me just knowing I'm not alone. So I encourage you to fulfill this priesthood stewardship to the best of your ability and build relationships with your families... there will always be those "no contacts" etc., but for those who will receive HTs it can be very rewarding to you both... GG Edited November 21, 2016 by Garden Girl 7
Kenngo1969 Posted November 21, 2016 Posted November 21, 2016 Garden Girl, May the Lord continue to bless you and keep you in the hollow of His Hand. Love, Your Younger Brother from Another Mother, -Ken 3
theplains Posted December 2, 2016 Posted December 2, 2016 On 20/11/2016 at 3:58 PM, mfbukowski said: We have been counseled recently to follow the spirit in these matters https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2016/10/emissaries-to-the-church?lang=eng Keeping the wards small (usually under 250 members) goes a long way to help the order to visit being carried out. Thanks, Jim
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2016 Posted December 3, 2016 2 hours ago, theplains said: Keeping the wards small (usually under 250 members) goes a long way to help the order to visit being carried out. Thanks, Jim IN today's society with single mothers etc, it is hard to get enough Melchizadek Priesthood holders in such a small ward. Maybe in Utah it works, or in affluent areas, but in your typical urban ward, the demographics don't typically work that way. The church uses the # of Melchiz PH. as a stat to determine how large a ward should be. 2
Calm Posted December 3, 2016 Posted December 3, 2016 3 hours ago, theplains said: Keeping the wards small (usually under 250 members) goes a long way to help the order to visit being carried out. Thanks, Jim You are not a member, right? I am wondering why you consider yourself familiar enough with the workings of the Church to make such pronouncements. 3
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2016 Posted December 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Calm said: You are not a member, right? I am wondering why you consider yourself familiar enough with the workings of the Church to make such pronouncements. Yeah, that was very weird indeed. Maybe he is a former member- that was a stake-level comment even if incorrect. 250 members is a very small ward- sacrament attendance would probably around 80 or so- hereabouts that is a ward about to be closed down if it gets that low. I am helping out in a ward about that size and am pretty sure it will be absorbed into another ward soon. If it is a new growing ward that would be different, but if it was bigger and declining and hits that number, it's not going to be around much longer.
Rain Posted December 4, 2016 Posted December 4, 2016 On Friday, December 02, 2016 at 4:50 PM, theplains said: Keeping the wards small (usually under 250 members) goes a long way to help the order to visit being carried out. Thanks, Jim I'm not sure that it would. I'm curious to know why you think you would? Whether you have a ward with 250 or 1000 people the number of people each home or visiting teacher visits would be about the same. Roughly 3-4 homes. (Some people may have more due to the number inactive, but if activity rates are the same the number of people per HT/VT should remain the same.)
bluebell Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 On 12/2/2016 at 4:50 PM, theplains said: Keeping the wards small (usually under 250 members) goes a long way to help the order to visit being carried out. Thanks, Jim The number of members in a ward really doesn't make a difference, since the number of available VT/HT increases as the number of members increases. However, the number of active people in the ward really does make a difference. In our ward in North Dakota many sisters had 5 or 6 sisters they were asked to visit because there were a lot more members than people doing visiting teaching.
Calm Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 (edited) The geographical size could make a difference, but larger size could easily be compensated for by having sisters/brothers visit those near them and not match up individuals on opposite sides of the ward. And a smaller size may add multiple callings for people removing the time and resources needed to effectively visit and teach and serve. Edited December 5, 2016 by Calm
sjdawg Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 On 11/20/2016 at 11:58 PM, mfbukowski said: Sometimes visiting is actually not the most appropriate thing to do with highly inactives and people who have asked not to be contacted Sometimes a personal note or card or a mailed lesson is the most appropriate solution- the key is letting the member know that you care and love them, even if perhaps they do not want to see you. It can be like a member of the family with some enmity toward your side of the family or whatever- you need to reach out and do your best to resolve the issue without being too pushy. My entire home teaching list is made of people who have asked not to be contacted- and I have found that showing up, in some cases, can be the worst thing you can do. I would suggest that the appropriate thing to do for people who have asked not to be contacted is to not contact them.. 2
mfbukowski Posted December 5, 2016 Posted December 5, 2016 1 hour ago, sjdawg said: I would suggest that the appropriate thing to do for people who have asked not to be contacted is to not contact them.. That is not really church policy, but I can't say I disagree. I posted that for some who face the same challenge. The reality is that events happen in people's lives and part of being a minister of Christ is to go after those lost sheep especially if and when their lives change. I am not a horribly compassionate person from this point of view- if people do not want to be in the church- that is their choice. So for me it is an exercise in obedience and I have learned a lot by doing the follow up anyway 2
Bernard Gui Posted December 8, 2016 Posted December 8, 2016 On 11/20/2016 at 0:58 PM, mfbukowski said: Sometimes visiting is actually not the most appropriate thing to do with highly inactives and people who have asked not to be contacted Sometimes a personal note or card or a mailed lesson is the most appropriate solution- the key is letting the member know that you care and love them, even if perhaps they do not want to see you. It can be like a member of the family with some enmity toward your side of the family or whatever- you need to reach out and do your best to resolve the issue without being too pushy. My entire home teaching list is made of people who have asked not to be contacted- and I have found that showing up, in some cases, can be the worst thing you can do. We have been counseled recently to follow the spirit in these matters https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2016/10/emissaries-to-the-church?lang=eng I am also a student of latin amo amas amat What matters is that we LOVE and strive to visit each home, but sometimes that is not the best solution under the circumstances. My companion and I mail about 50 letters each month to ward members who do not want visitors. We include a brief scriptural message, holiday greeting, or excerpt of a First Presidency message, and include our phone numbers in case the folks are ever in need. We have been doing this for over three years. Finally, last week an inactive sister who is going to have surgery called and asked us to come and give her a Priesthood blessing. She is the first to respond to our letters, but it was well worth the effort. 3
Bernard Gui Posted December 8, 2016 Posted December 8, 2016 On 12/4/2016 at 9:42 PM, mfbukowski said: That is not really church policy, but I can't say I disagree. I posted that for some who face the same challenge. The reality is that events happen in people's lives and part of being a minister of Christ is to go after those lost sheep especially if and when their lives change. I am not a horribly compassionate person from this point of view- if people do not want to be in the church- that is their choice. So for me it is an exercise in obedience and I have learned a lot by doing the follow up anyway My sentiments exactly. A humorous experience I had in relation to this.... We visited one of those names that have been on the inactive list for years and years to see if he would accept home teachers. He came to the door and said, "I know you! You're the Mormons!" "Yes," we said. He replied, "You folks come around every few years, but I don't know why. I've been a Methodist all my life and have never even been inside a Mormon church." "Well," we said. "Your name and address are on our membership rolls and that means you were once baptized a Mormon." "Well, I don't know how that can be. I have never done that and I've explained this to several previous visitors." So we said good night. Eventually, we were able to have his "membership" removed without having to go through the usual processes. Never found out why there was a record for him....we verified that it was his name, not someone else just with the wrong address. 2
Bernard Gui Posted December 8, 2016 Posted December 8, 2016 From the 1944 LDS Church Handbook of Instructions: Quote Ward teaching is so important that it should take precedence in the selection of ward officers. Unless this is done, the results obtained will fail to meet the Lord's requirements. Indeed, the success or failure of ward teaching depends on intelligent, competent, devoted activity of the teachers. Therefore, every endeavor must be made to secure the best men for the service. Otherwise, it will not prosper. Not much has changed. 1
Jeanne Posted December 8, 2016 Posted December 8, 2016 34 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: My sentiments exactly. A humorous experience I had in relation to this.... We visited one of those names that have been on the inactive list for years and years to see if he would accept home teachers. He came to the door and said, "I know you! You're the Mormons!" "Yes," we said. He replied, "You folks come around every few years, but I don't know why. I've been a Methodist all my life and have never even been inside a Mormon church." "Well," we said. "Your name and address are on our membership rolls and that means you were once baptized a Mormon." "Well, I don't know how that can be. I have never done that and I've explained this to several previous visitors." So we said good night. Eventually, we were able to have his "membership" removed without having to go through the usual processes. Never found out why there was a record for him....we verified that it was his name, not someone else just with the wrong address.
pogi Posted December 8, 2016 Posted December 8, 2016 53 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: My sentiments exactly. A humorous experience I had in relation to this.... We visited one of those names that have been on the inactive list for years and years to see if he would accept home teachers. He came to the door and said, "I know you! You're the Mormons!" "Yes," we said. He replied, "You folks come around every few years, but I don't know why. I've been a Methodist all my life and have never even been inside a Mormon church." "Well," we said. "Your name and address are on our membership rolls and that means you were once baptized a Mormon." "Well, I don't know how that can be. I have never done that and I've explained this to several previous visitors." So we said good night. Eventually, we were able to have his "membership" removed without having to go through the usual processes. Never found out why there was a record for him....we verified that it was his name, not someone else just with the wrong address. Perhaps he is from the "baseball baptism" era, and thought that he was just going for a dip before being allowed to join the baseball or basketball team. 1
Jeanne Posted December 9, 2016 Posted December 9, 2016 On 12/4/2016 at 9:24 PM, sjdawg said: I would suggest that the appropriate thing to do for people who have asked not to be contacted is to not contact them.. So true..at least in some cases. When I had to assign VT's to different homes, the RS president wanted to at least just stop by or check in...some of this was not met well. On 12/4/2016 at 9:24 PM, sjdawg said:
Bernard Gui Posted December 9, 2016 Posted December 9, 2016 41 minutes ago, Jeanne said: So true..at least in some cases. When I had to assign VT's to different homes, the RS president wanted to at least just stop by or check in...some of this was not met well. Why do we want to antagonize them by not allowing them their agency? If they say No Visitors, we should respect that and ask if they would accept a letter or email.
Recommended Posts