Should there be a new calling to focus on the "Poor and Needy"?

[CV75]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

They are currently doing this in our stake.

I found the statistics speaking volumes about the benefits of tying the spiritual and temporal goals together: increased tithing, personal religious observance, sacrament meeting and temple attendance, etc. All this develops individuals more inclined to reach out to others (the poor and needy) under their own inspiration and initiative and in more customized ways, such as the bag of oranges story in another thread Posted 20 hours ago

[rongo]

What is the "fiasco in Draper?"

Some of my thoughts:

1) I think that any time the Church concocts new callings to perform duties that should be done with existing ones, the Church and people lose. It's a lesser blessing than if the Church had done what it was called to do. We already have a calling dedicated to helping the poor and needy: bishops and the Relief Society. Setting up callings like "ward poor & needy specialist" is window dressing and wouldn't actually lead to more help for the poor and needy. It would just add to the ward bureaucracy and list of dreaded callings (for some people).

2) In my experience, most of the poor and needy are not actually helped by monetary or commodity church assistance. The assistance enables and prolongs their cycles of need. This is a difficult thing for bishops to balance. You have King Benjamin's cutting counsel that is hard for people like me (wise as serpents). You also have bishops who are "harmless as doves." I inherited a $50,000 deficit in fast offerings in my current ward, and correcting this problem was --- not fun. Many angry and bitter people who had received "full services" welfare from the Church for two years (housing, utilities, car, food, etc. fully-paid on a monthly basis by the Church. No effort to find work). When I was called and the welfare gravy train stopped, they magically found work or moved away (some of these people needed to live somewhere else where there was work, they didn't have a commute, etc.). The thing is that all this help for years didn't actually help them in their poor & needy condition. What they needed was teaching and insistence on welfare principles. I think that doing the easy thing and just giving them constant assistance was actually spiritually damaging for them. It certainly didn't lift them out of their predicaments, and there was a spiritual cost. Not one of them was active in the Church , and they resented efforts to activate them. And, boy, did they resent cutting off the assistance!

 

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

 The thing is that all this help for years didn't actually help them in their poor & needy condition. What they needed was teaching and insistence on welfare principles. I think that doing the easy thing and just giving them constant assistance was actually spiritually damaging for them. It certainly didn't lift them out of their predicaments, and there was a spiritual cost. Not one of them was active in the Church , and they resented efforts to activate them. And, boy, did they resent cutting off the assistance!

 

My observations have been similar.  Long term church assistance is spiritual death.  There are many people who need and benefit from assistance while between jobs or when unexpected medial problems come up.  But the people who are receiving assistance from the bishop month in and month our are slowly dying spiritually. 

[Gray]

13 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

My observations have been similar.  Long term church assistance is spiritual death.  There are many people who need and benefit from assistance while between jobs or when unexpected medial problems come up.  But the people who are receiving assistance from the bishop month in and month our are slowly dying spiritually. 

What do you mean when you say, "dying spiritually"?

[Duncan]

Just now, Gray said:

What do you mean when you say, "dying spiritually"?

add that to the brethren who receive assistance from the Church, I wonder if they are dying spiritually. Plus, the PEF which people get money for training, are they also dying spiritually -at least while they are in school and they aren't when they get a job an can pay it back, one day you're dead but the first day on the job you're sailing spiritually!

[rongo]

1 minute ago, Duncan said:

add that to the brethren who receive assistance from the Church, I wonder if they are dying spiritually. Plus, the PEF which people get money for training, are they also dying spiritually -at least while they are in school and they aren't when they get a job an can pay it back, one day you're dead but the first day on the job you're sailing spiritually!

Not the same thing at all. We're talking about fast offering funds paying people's bills beyond an extraordinary emergency (meaning that it doesn't keep re-occurring). Definitely, things happen (medical emergencies, job loss, death, divorce, etc.).  

In my experience it is spiritually damaging for people not to live welfare/self-reliance principles. There are people who need to be taught, and the only way to teach them is to make them really swim, without the flotation devices (or the actual boat). Many church members (and some non-members) view the Church as a backstop or a safety net they can always turn to when they run out of money, so they can spend money on entertainment, eating out, etc. I think this mentality in particular is spiritually damaging. People come to the church with a shut-off notice for electric or water, and have had the means to pay their bill with budgeting, but chose not to because they can go to the Church. In my experience, absolutely everyone has gone to family first, but they really only go to family when the Church does not help. It is less-embarrassing for most to go to the Church than it is to go to family, so they will only do so if absolutely necessary. And, the only time it becomes necessary is when the Church won't help. 

Sometimes, the only way people will learn to prioritize is if their utilities are turned off, and the Church constantly keeping this from happening prevents them from learning through their own experience that you pay your priorities first. 

Sadly, there are people for whom assistance won't actually get them in a better place. They will be in exactly the same situation next month, and the month after that, so assistance is just keeping the wolves at bay for a month. I think it is much better to use fast offerings to attack the actual problem, which may be relocation. 

I also don't do anything I'm not asking anyone else to do. I'm a teacher, but during the summer, I do day labor construction. They will hire anybody who will go in at 4:00 AM for job assignments, and it pays daily. There are drug addicts and people with all sorts of problems who do construction clean-up. Men (and able-bodied women; there are also women workers there) will never go in and work through them, though, and they are resentful that I ask them to show me that they are trying to do everything that they can to bring in some income. And that daily cash flow would enable them to pay bills, put gas in their car, and buy food. 

This state of things is actually spiritually damaging. It is not good for people to be propped up by the government or a church when they haven't done "all they can do."

[HappyJackWagon]

I wonder if there are similarities in attitudes about helping the poor and needy without expectation that they earn or qualify for help, and the acceptance of grace as an unearned gift.

Sometimes people need help. They shouldn't have to prove that they won't need very much help before they receive any. It seems like the idea of self-reliance in welfare issues could run over into the idea of self-reliance in spiritual issues- e.g. the faith versus works argument. Does a hyper-focus on temporal self-reliance set up members to focus more on works, than grace?

[Duncan]

Just now, rongo said:

Not the same thing at all. We're talking about fast offering funds paying people's bills beyond an extraordinary emergency (meaning that it doesn't keep re-occurring). Definitely, things happen (medical emergencies, job loss, death, divorce, etc.).  

In my experience it is spiritually damaging for people not to live welfare/self-reliance principles. There are people who need to be taught, and the only way to teach them is to make them really swim, without the flotation devices (or the actual boat). Many church members (and some non-members) view the Church as a backstop or a safety net they can always turn to when they run out of money, so they can spend money on entertainment, eating out, etc. I think this mentality in particular is spiritually damaging. People come to the church with a shut-off notice for electric or water, and have had the means to pay their bill with budgeting, but chose not to because they can go to the Church. In my experience, absolutely everyone has gone to family first, but they really only go to family when the Church does not help. It is less-embarrassing for most to go to the Church than it is to go to family, so they will only do so if absolutely necessary. And, the only time it becomes necessary is when the Church won't help. 

Sometimes, the only way people will learn to prioritize is if their utilities are turned off, and the Church constantly keeping this from happening prevents them from learning through their own experience that you pay your priorities first. 

Sadly, there are people for whom assistance won't actually get them in a better place. They will be in exactly the same situation next month, and the month after that, so assistance is just keeping the wolves at bay for a month. I think it is much better to use fast offerings to attack the actual problem, which may be relocation. 

I also don't do anything I'm not asking anyone else to do. I'm a teacher, but during the summer, I do day labor construction. They will hire anybody who will go in at 4:00 AM for job assignments, and it pays daily. There are drug addicts and people with all sorts of problems who do construction clean-up. Men (and able-bodied women; there are also women workers there) will never go in and work through them, though, and they are resentful that I ask them to show me that they are trying to do everything that they can to bring in some income. And that daily cash flow would enable them to pay bills, put gas in their car, and buy food. 

This state of things is actually spiritually damaging. It is not good for people to be propped up by the government or a church when they haven't done "all they can do."

I get that, I do but what is "spiritually damaging" mean? you feel the spirit less in your life? if you don't or won't work you don't feel the spirit?

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I get that, I do but what is "spiritually damaging" mean? you feel the spirit less in your life? if you don't or won't work you don't feel the spirit?

Yes, and yes. There is actually a spiritual cost in not being self-reliant. 

[rongo]

8 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I wonder if there are similarities in attitudes about helping the poor and needy without expectation that they earn or qualify for help, and the acceptance of grace as an unearned gift.

Sometimes people need help. They shouldn't have to prove that they won't need very much help before they receive any. It seems like the idea of self-reliance in welfare issues could run over into the idea of self-reliance in spiritual issues- e.g. the faith versus works argument. Does a hyper-focus on temporal self-reliance set up members to focus more on works, than grace?

The flip side is that those who focus on grace really de-emphasize the "after all you can do" part. Grace and works are two sides to the same coin, and there needs to be a balance between them --- avoiding the extremes. 

I disagree that, because sometimes people need help, this should automatically be given. 

Spiritual self-reliance is a major problem as well, and it is the root of temporal self-reliance issues.

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/boyd-k-packer_self-reliance/

[Duncan]

Just now, rongo said:

Yes, and yes. There is actually a spiritual cost in not being self-reliant. 

I don't agree, I agree there are financial costs to not being self reliant

[HappyJackWagon]

8 minutes ago, rongo said:

Spiritual self-reliance is a major problem as well, and it is the root of temporal self-reliance issues.

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/boyd-k-packer_self-reliance/

You're not suggesting that those who are in temporal need are in that state because they are not being spiritually self-reliant, are you?

[rongo]

1 minute ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You're not suggesting that those who are in temporal need are in that state because they are not being spiritually self-reliant, are you?

Not in every case, no. But often, yes. 

You're not suggesting that there is never a connection between the two, are you? 

[HappyJackWagon]

4 minutes ago, rongo said:

Not in every case, no. But often, yes. 

You're not suggesting that there is never a connection between the two, are you? 

I accept that there could be a connection, but it's more of a correlation than causation. I think it is FAR too broad to claim that temporal need is caused by spiritual need. That kind of idea comes from prosperity gospel teachings and I don't accept it.

[cinepro]

2 hours ago, rongo said:

What is the "fiasco in Draper?"

 

 

Edited April 13, 2017 by cinepro

[Duncan]

Just now, cinepro said:

 

and these folks have a Temple, seems to have worked out well for them

[Gray]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

 

If that doesn't work, they could always cancel church on the 3rd Sundays and call it Service Sunday where everyone is encouraged to serve others outside of the immediate church community. But somehow I don't see that happening.  

I'd be down for that. But we'd need some guidance to keep it from being "let's rake leaves at the local cemetery" Sunday. 

[Gray]

34 minutes ago, rongo said:

Yes, and yes. There is actually a spiritual cost in not being self-reliant. 

Jesus and his apostles weren't self-reliant at all for their material things. 

[stemelbow]

14 minutes ago, Duncan said:

and these folks have a Temple, seems to have worked out well for them

Draper is 41% active LDS, so we can be assured that those in that crowd were the Draper residents that don't go to Church and aren't LDS. 

[rongo]

9 minutes ago, Gray said:

Jesus and his apostles weren't self-reliant at all for their material things. 

No, but the Church in Acts and beyond was (that's where you get teachings like the idle shall not eat the bread of the laborer, etc.). Jesus' ministry and how he/they lived was a special and unique thing, in many ways not seen before or since, and not something we can or should emulate on a one-to-one basis. He even taught things like "count the cost," etc.

Surely you're not arguing that we shouldn't be "self-reliant at all for our material things" because of Jesus' three-year ministry?

[rongo]

26 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I accept that there could be a connection, but it's more of a correlation than causation. I think it is FAR too broad to claim that temporal need is caused by spiritual need. That kind of idea comes from prosperity gospel teachings and I don't accept it.

I don't think it matters whether the one is caused by the other, or there is a correlation between the two. Either way, they are linked.

I don't think I accept prosperity gospel teachings, either. I'm poorer from a worldly standpoint than probably anybody posting here, but I am self-reliant, and I feel richly blessed by living the gospel. I don't see righteousness correlating with visible wealth. I do see people who don't live self-reliance and welfare principles who don't enjoy the blessings of the Spirit as well as they could be.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

What do you mean when you say, "dying spiritually"?

People start relying on others to take care of them instead of taking care of themselves.  They constantly need help from other ward members, but are never able to help anyone.  Church attendance is spotty except for the Sundays when they have an appointment with the bishop to get a bill paid.  Never seem to be able to hold callings.  No progress toward holding a temple recommend.  Unable to attend job placement of assistance programs.  etc etc etc

Some do have genuine problems that require medical or counseling help. But most seem to be hooked on a welfare lifestyle.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Gray said:

Ibut it still seems like it's on the back burner compared to work for the dead or reactivation. 

 

I don't think this is fair.  They are in the process of implementing two major programs and growing a third (the Pathways).  The other goals have been in place for ages.

 The Church is not the only one involved in setting this stuff up since they are wisely reserving resources by teaming up with locals.  It takes a huge amount of time for these organizations (especially if volunteer) to decide how they will plan on using new volunteers the best, start new programs, work out any legal issues, etc. and that takes a lot of back and forth.  Then it also takes time to train volunteers for the Church only self reliant program. They have seen how too much too soon too fast decreases participation, so they are wisely taking it slow, establishing a good foundation so it works smoothly once it gets going.

 Once the programs are fully in place, then one will be more able to fairly judge investment in the programs.

[Duncan]

Just now, stemelbow said:

Draper is 41% active LDS, so we can be assured that those in that crowd were the Draper residents that don't go to Church and aren't LDS. 

if I were a betting man I'd put money on that i'm totally judging of course

[ksfisher]

19 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Draper is 41% active LDS, so we can be assured that those in that crowd were the Draper residents that don't go to Church and aren't LDS. 

I suppose that anyone here who is taking in homeless people can start throwing stones at the people in Draper.